












































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































wo reSERA RT | 


| 


Theological Seminary, 


PRINCETON, N. J. 





<i se 


‘The Stephen Collins Donation, 

KD 620 .C34 1847 v.95 

Campbell, John Campbell, 
1779-1861. 

Lives of the Lord 
Chancellors and Keepers of 








hh 


— 


ig PI ares 
ry 





Digitized by the Internet Archive ° 
in 2022 with funding from 
. Princeton Theological Seminary Library 


https://archive.org/details/livesoflordchancO5camp_0 





CAMPBELL’S 


LIVES 


THE LORD CHANCELLORS, 


SECOND SERIKS. 


1 
“A 


PaO LIaF 


rus 9" 
f my 
: wy yes 
es 





. THE 


LIVES 


OF 


THE LORD CHANCELLORS 


AND 


KEEPERS OF THE GREAT SEAL 


OF 


ENGLAND. 


FROM THE EARLIEST TIMES TILL THE REIGN OF 
KING GEORGE IV. 


BY 


JOHN LORD CAMPBELL, A.M. F.R.S.E. 


SECOND SERIES, 


FROM THE REVOLUTION OF 1688, TO THE DEATH OF LORD CHANCELLOR 
THURLOW, IN 1806. 


IN TWO VOLUMES. 


VOL ¥ 





PHILADELPHIA: 
LEA AND BLANCHARD. 
1848. 


Cc. SHERMAN, PRINTER, 


19 St. James Street. 


CONTENTS 


CF 


DH Ey eee ES Orr UW Me i: 


CHAPTER CXXIX. 


LIFE OF LORD CHANCELLOR HARDWICKE FROM HIS BIRTH TILL HE WAS APPOINTED 
ATTORNEY-GENERAL. 


Character of Lord Hardwicke, Page 33. Difficulty in doing Justice to it, 33. 
His Origin, 34. His Birth, 34. His Education, 34. He is put as Clerk toan 
Attorney, 35. His Diligence and Desire of Improvement, 35. Greatly pleases 
his Master, 35._ How he escaped from the 'l'asks imposed upon him by-his 
Mistress, 35. Friendships he formed while in the Attorney’s Office, 36. He 
is introduced to Lord Chief Justice Parker, and becomes Law Tutor to his 
Sons, 37. He writes a Paper in the ‘‘ Spectator,’’ 39. His Preparations for 
the Bar, 40. He is called, 41. He rapidly gets into business, 41. Goes 
the Western Circuit, 41. His Translation of Coke upon Littleton into 
Verse, 42. His Marriage, 43. He practices in the Court of Chancery, 44. 
Lord Macclesfield’s excessive Partiality for him, 44. He distinguishes him- 
self there, 44.. He is returned to Parliament, 45. His Prudence in not speak- 
ing, 45. The Solicitor-General accuses the Attorney-General of Corruption, 
46. The Attorney-General is acquitted and the Solicitor-General dismissed, 
46. Yorke is appointed Solicitor-General, and knighted, 46. Envy created 
by this Appointment, 47. At first not employed in the Court of Chancery, 
47. Soon in any cause, 48. He isre-elected for Lewes, 48. Sir R. Ray- 
mond, Attorney-General, 43. His Speech on the Prosecution of Layer for 
High Treason, 48. 


CHAPTER CXXX. 


CONTINUATION OF THE LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE TILL HE WAS APPOINTED LORD 
CHANCELLOR. 


He is promoted to be Attorney-General, 49. An excellent Law Officer, 49. 
His Mode of conducting Excise Prosecutions in the Exchequer, 50. Ex- 
officio Informations for Libel, 50. He writes a Pamphlet on the Judicial 
Functions of the Master of the Rolls, 51. He supports Bill for the Banish- 
ment of Atterbury, 51. His Behaviour on the Impeachment of Lord Mac- 
clesfield, 51. Yorke devotes himself to the Duke of Newcastle, 52. ~Acces- 
sion of George 1I., 53. Bill to prohibit Loans to Foreign States, 53. Yorke’s 
Speech for an Augmentation of the Forces, 54. Walpole’s Excise Scheme, 
55. Yorke’s Defence of it, 55. His moderate Success in the House of Com- 
mons, 55. Yorke created Chief Justice of the King’s Bench, and a Peer, 
by the Title of Lord Hardwicke, 56. Lord Hardwicke as a Common Law 
Judge, 56. His management of the Puisne Judges, 56. Lord Hardwicke’s 
great Success in the House of Lords as a Debater, 57._ His Speech on main- 
taining a Standing Army, 57. Mortmain Acts,58. Lord Hardwicke on the 
Legality of employing the Military to suppress Riots, 59. Explosion of Gun- 
powder in Westminster Hall, 58. Law Arrangements on the Death of Lord 
Talbot, 60. Lord Hardwicke Chancellor, 61. 


vl 


CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER CXXXl. 


CONTINUATION OF THE LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE TILL THE DEATH OF QUEEN 
CAROLINE. 


Censure on Lord Hardwicke for his Conduct to Thomson the Poet, 62. Lord 


Hardwicke as an Equity Judge, 63. Foundation of his great Excellence, 63. 
His Demeanour in Court, 65. His Judgments, 67. Lord Hardwicke’s 
Chancellorship considered the Golden Age of Equity, 68. No Decree of 
Lord Hardwicke reversed, 68. His Demeanour on the Woolsack, and Man-« 
ner of disposing of the judicial Business of the House of Lords, 68. All Per- 
sons believing in a God may be Witnesses, and are to be sworn in the Man- 
ner binding on their Consciences, according to their own peculiar religious 
Notions, 69. The Writer, but not the Receiver of a Letter, may obtain an 
Injunction against publishing it, 71. Q.asto Rule, thatan Abridgment ofa 
Book may be published against the Consent of the author, 72. Punishment 
for marrying a Ward of Chancery without leave of the Chancellor, 73. Law 
of Paraphernalia, 73. Woman holding property under her Husband’s Will 
to go to another if she marries again, bound to answer a Bill of Discovery as 
to whether she has taken a second Husband, 74. Bond given by a married 
Man to a Female whom he had seduced, she knowing that he was a married 
Man, void, 74. The Laws of England do not extend to Isle of Man, 75. 
Lord Hardwicke’s Decision respecting the Effect of Attainder for Treason 
on Scotch entailed Estates, 75. Censure upon as regards Law Reform, 76. 
Commission to inquire into Fees in Courts of Justice after ten Years makes 
a Report, 77. Abuse of writing only a few Words ona folio Page of Law 
Proceedings to increase Fees, 77. ‘This Abuse pointed out by the Report, 
but allowed to remain unremedied, 77. Lord Hardwicke’s laudable Exercise 
of judicial Patronage, 78. Charge against him of stopping the Promotion of 
other Judges to the Peerage that he might be the sole Law Lord, 78. Lord 
Hardwicke in Politics, 78. Disputes between George IJ. and Frederick 
Prince of Wales, 79. Lord Hardwicke selected to deliver a Reprimand 
from the King to the Prince, 79: Bill to punish the Citizens of Edinburgh 
for the Murder of Captain Porteous, 80. 


CHAPTER CXXXII. 


CONTINUATION OF THE LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE TILL THE RESIGNATION OF SIR 


ROBERT WALPOLE. 


Death of Queen Caroline, 81. Lord Hardwicke’s Speech for keeping up the 


Army, 81. Plan of the Opposition to involve the Country in a War with 
Spain, 83. Debate on Convention with Spain to settle Differences, 83. 
Vindication of Lord Hardwicke from the Charge of encouraging War, 83. 
National Infatuation, 85. Misconduct and Imprudence of Walpole in yield- 
ing to the War Cry, 85. Lord Hardwicke eager for prosecuting the War 
with Spain, 85. His Speech on the Liberty of the Press, 86. Danger of 
abusing and of abandoning Privilege, 88. Lord Hardwicke’s Attack on the 
Opposition Peers, 88. His unsuccessful Vindication of the Government from 
the Charge of slighting the House of Lords, 88. And the unskilful Conduct 
of the War, 89. Prorogation, 89. Downfall of Sir Robert Walpole, 89. 
Treachery of the Duke of Newcastle, 89. Vindication of Lord Hardwicke, 
89. His Speech in Defence of Walpole, 90. New Parliament, ‘* Second 
Sight’’ of the Scots, 91. 


CHAPTER CXXXIII. 


CONTINUATION OF THE LIFE OF LORD HARD WICKE TILL THE BREAKING OUT OF THE 


REBELLION OF 1745. 


Lord Hardwicke’s Anxieties on the Dismissal of Sir R. Walpole, 92. Formation 


of the new Administration, 92. Lord Hardwicke’s Speech against the Bill 
for indenait ane Witnesses against Sir Robert Walpole, 93. Parliamentary 
Reports by Dr. Johnson, 94. Lord Hardwicke’s Influence, 95. Lord Hard- 
wicke’s Speech to defend the Employment of Hanoverian Troops, 95. Death 
of the Earl of Wilmington, 96. Mr. Pelham succeeds him, 96. Ascendency 
of Lord Hardwicke, 96. 


CONTENTS. Vil 


CHAPTER CXXXIV. 


CONTINUATION OF THE LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE TILL THE DEATH OF FREDERICK 
PRINCE OF WALES. 


Rebellion of 1745, 97. Message from the Crown, and Address, 97. Sir R. Wal- 
pole (Lord Orford’s) Speech in the House of Lords, 97. Apathy in the pub- 
lic Mind, 99. New Law of Treason, 99. Character of Walpole as a Minis- 
ter, 98. Opposed by the Duke of Bedford, 99. Impolicy of the New Law, 
100. Breaking out of the Rebellion, 100. King’s Return from abroad, 101 
His Indifference, 101. King’s Speech written by Lord Hardwicke, 102. State 
of the Public Mind, 102. Success of the Rebels, 103. Q. What would have 
happened if the Rebels had marched on from Derby to London? 103. Minis- 
terial Crisis, 104. Victory of Culloden, 104. Trial of the rebel Lords, 104. 
Lord Hardwicke’s Address to them, 105. Sentence passed by Lord Hard- 
wicke, 106. Lord Lovat, 108. Lord Hardwicke’s preliminary Address to 
him, 108. Unjustifiable Length of the Speech in pronouncing sentence, 108. 
Scandalous Execution of Charles Radcliffe on an old Attainder, 108. Excel- 
lent Measure of Lord Hardwicke for abolishing hereditary Jurisdictions in 
Scotland, 109. He is thwarted by the Scotch Judges, 110. His Speech in 
Defence of it, 111. Power of Parliament over the Articles of Union, 111. 
Lord Hardwicke’s ‘‘ Coercion Bill,’’ 113. Highland Garb to be abolished, 
113. Effects of this Bill, 115. Quiet times after the Rebellion, 116. Lord 
Hardwicke’s Speech on the Mutiny Bill, 116. 


CHAPTER CXXXV. 


CONTINUATION OF THE LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE TILL HE RESIGNED THE GREAT 
SEAL. 


Regency Bill, 117. Lord Hardwicke supports the Bill for the Reformation of the 
Calendar, 117. Bill respecting the forfeited Estatesin Scotland, 118. Lord 
Hardwicke’s Jew Bill, 119. Lord Hardwicke’s Marriage Bill, 119. Defects 
in the old Law of Marriage, 120. Defects in the New Measure, 120. Oppo- 
sition to it in the Commons, 121. Attack by Henry Fox on Lord Hardwicke, 
121. Attack by Lord Hardwicke on Henry Fox, 121. Death of Mr. Pelham, 
122. Lord Hardwicke’s Letter to Mr. Pitt, describing the State of Parties . 
on the Death of Mr. Pelham, 122. Lord Hardwicke created an Earl, 122. 
Duke of Newcastle Prime Minister, 122. Lord Hardwicke’s Mode of pre- 
paring to speak in the House of Lords, 123. Lord Hardwicke’s Speech in 
the House of Lords against the Militia Bill, 124. Admiral Byng’s Retreat 
without relieving Minorca, 128. Weakness of the Minister, 128. Murray 
resolves to leave the House of Commons, and insists on being appointed Chief 
Justice of the King’s Bench, 129. Resignation of Duke of Newcastle, 129. 
Lord Hardwicke resolves to resign, 129. His motives, 129. His Resignation, 
130. 


CHAPTER CXXXVI. 
CONTINUATION OF THE LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE TILL THE DEATH OF GEORGE Il. 


Lord Hardwicke an Ex-chancellor, 130. His fortune and Provision by Office 
for his Family, 130. His first Appearance at the King’s Levee as an Ex- 
chancellor, 130. Lord Hardwicke’s Behaviour out of Office, 131. He opposes 
the Bill for releasing the Members of the Court-martial on Admiral Byng from 
their Oath of Secrecy, 131. Formation of Mr. Pitt’s first Administration, 
132. Letters from Lord Hardwicke to Mr. Pitt, 133. Difficulty about the 
Disposal of the Great Seal, 133. Lord Hardwicke assents in disposing of the 
Great Seal, 133. Lord Hardwicke to Mr. Pitt on the new Ministry, 134. 
Lord Hardwicke asa Member of Mr. Pitt’s Cabinet, 136. He opposes the 
Bill to amend Habeas Corpus Act, 136. Censure on Lord Hardwicke for 
doing nothing as a Law Reformer, 136. Lord Hardwicke at the Conclusion 
of the Reign of George IT., 137. 


vill 


CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER CXXXVII. 


CONCLUSION OF THE LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE. 


Accession of George III., 137. Lord Hardwicke lauds excessively the Measure 


to prevent the Dismissal of Judges at the Commencement of a new Reign, 
137. Lord Hardwicke in Opposition, 138. Preliminaries of Peace, 139. 
Lord Hardwicke’s Speech against the Peace, 189. Lord Hardwicke’s Speech 
against the Cider Bill, 141. John Wilkes, 142. Lord, Hardwicke’s Letter 
to his Son, giving an Account of Negotiations for forming a new Ministry, 
143. Lord Hardwicke struck with a mortal Disorder, 146. His Opinion of 
Parliamentary Privilege in Wilkes’s Case, 146. His death, 147. His epi- 
taph, 147. His Character, 147. His long Career, 147. His love of Money 
and bad Manners, 148. Cooksey’s Account of him in Society, 148. Chal- 
mers, 149. His Estrangement from Literature and Men oh Letters, 149. 
His Letter to Lord Kames, 150. Whether a good classical Scholar? 151. 
His Poetry, 152. No personal Anecdotes of him, 152. Observation upon 
him by Horace Walpole, 153. Daines Barrington, 153. Lord Chesterfield, 
153. His Marriage happy, 153. Character of Lady Hardwicke, 153. Absurd 
Charge against her, 154. His Children, 154. His present Representative, 
155. 


CHAPTER CXXXVIII. 


wm 


LIFE OF LORD CHANCELLOR NORTHINGTON FROM HIS BIRTH TILL HE RECEIVED THE 


GREAT SEAL. 


Glance at Character and History of Lord Northington, 155, His Family, 155. 


His Father, 155. His Birth, 156. His Education at Westminster, 156. At 
Christ Church, 157. His Love of port Wine, 157. Entered of the Inner 
Temple, 157. His legal Studies, 158, He is called to the Bar, 158. Practices 
in the King’s Bench, and goes the Western Circuit, 158. He is challenged 
to fight a Duel by a Quaker, 158. His Gaieties at Bath, 159. He is in love, 
159. His Marriage, 159. His narrow Circumstances, 160. Death of his 
elder brother, 160. He is elected Recorder of Bath, and M. P. for that City, 
160. He attaches himself to Leicester House, 160. No Trace of his 
Speeches in the House of Commons, 161. Death of Frederick Prince of 
Wales, 161. Henley Solicitor-General to George Prince of Wales, after- 
wards George III., 161. His Success with a Silk Gown, 161. He is made 
Attorney-General to the King, 161. He practises in Court of Chancery, 161. 
Political Changes before Formation of Mr. Pitt’s Ministry, 162. Henley 
receives the Great Seal as Lord Keeper, 163. His Interview with Chief 
Justice Willes, 163. 


CHAPTER CXXXIX. 


CONTINUATION OF THE LIFE OF LORD NORTHINGTON TILL THE DEATH OF GEORGE II. 


His political Insignificance, 164. Lord Keeper Henley as an Equity Judge, 164. 


Hardship upon him when his Decrees were reversed, 165. His Judgments 
reported by his Grandson, Lord Henley,165. Decree setting aside a Deed of 
Gift obtained by religious Imposture, 165. His famous Decision in Burgess 
v. Wheate, 167. Perpetuities, 167. Censure upon him by Lord Eldon, 168. 
His Blunder in Drury v. Drury, 168. He is made a Peer to preside at the 
Trial of Lord Ferrers, 169. His Demeanour on this Occasion, 169. His 
Speech in passing Sentence of Death, 170. His Humanity to the Prisoner 
after his Conviction, 171. 


CHAPTER CXL. 


CONTINUATION OF THE LIFE OF LORD NORTHINGTON TILL HE RESIGNED THE GREAT 


SEAL. 


Accession of George III., Henley elevated to the Dignity of Lord Chancellor, and 


Karl of Northington, 172. His Application to the King to abolish after-dinner 


CONTENTS. zh 


Sittings in Court, 172. He adheres to Lord Bute, 173. Resignation of Lord 
Bute, and Ministry of Duke of Bedford, 173. Ascendency of George Gren- 
ville, 173. Lord Northington Lord High Steward at the Trial of Lord 
Byron for Murder, 174. Formation of the Rockingham Administration, 175. 
Repeal of the Stamp Act, 175. Power of Parliament to tax the Colonies, 
175. Lord Northington’s Invective against the Americans, 176. Lord 
Mansfield’s Disclaimer, 177. Lord Northington wishes a Change of Govern- 
ment, 177. Coalition between George III. and Mr. Pitt to turn out Lord 
Rockingham, 178. Lord Northington’s Scheme for turning out the Rock- 
ingham Administration, 178. Lord Northington advises the King to send 
for Mr. Pitt, 179. The King’s Letter to Mr. Pitt, 179. Lord Northing- 
ton’s Letter to Mr. Pitt, 180. Mr. Pitt’s Letter to Lord Northington, 180. 
Mr. Pitt’s Letter to the King, 181. Lord Northington to Mr. Pitt, 181. 
Same to Same, 18]. Formation of Mr. Pitt’s last Administration, 182. 
Lord Northington Resigns the Great Seal, and is appointed President of the 
Council, 182. 


CHAPTER CXLI. 


8 
CONCLUSION OF THE LIFE OF LORD NORTHINGTON. 


Pension, &c., to Lord Northington, 183. Order in Council against the Export- 
ation of Corn, 183. Lord Northington contends that this was lawful, and that 
a Bill of Indemnity was unnecessary, 184. Lord Mansfield refutes him, 184. 
Lord Northivgton desirous of retiring, 184. Joint Representation of the 
Duke of Grafton and Lord Northington to Lord Chatham, 185. Lord North- 
ington to the Duke of Grafton, expressing Intention to retire, 185. Same to 
Same, giving an Account of a Visit to St. James’s, 185. Same to Same, 
on the disordered State of public Affairs, 186. Lord Northington to the 
Duke of Grafton, expressing his Devotion to the King, 186. Same to Same, 
describing his debilitated Condition, 186. Duke of Grafton’s Character of 
Lord Northington, 186. Sameto Same, on the Government of Canada, &c., 
_ 187. Lord Northington resigns, 188. His improved Health, 188. He de- 
clines an Offer to be made Lord Privy Seal, 188. Lord Northington to the 
Duke of Grafton in reference to Wilkes, 188. Lord Northington’s Amuse- 
ments in his Retirement, 189. His Confessor, 189. His Death, 189. His 
Monument, 189. His Descendants, 189. His Character, 190. Asa Judge, 
190. Nota Law Reformer, 190. His Enjoyments, 191. His Stories, 191. 
His Habit of Swearing, 191. His Morality and Piety, 191. Amiable in 
domestic Life, 191. His Person, 192. His Descendants, 192. His present 
Representative, 192. 


CHAPTER CXLII. 


LIFE OF LORD CHANCELLOR CAMDEN FROM HIS BIRTH TILL THE DEATH OF 
GEORGE II. 


Great Merits of Lord Camden, 193. His Family, 193. Lord Chief Justice Pratt, 
his Father, 193. Birth of Charles Pratt, 194. At Eton, 194. At Cam- 
bridge, 194. Atthe Temple, 194. Called tothe Bar, 195. He is long with- 
out Business, 195. His Despair, 196. Poetical Address to comfort him, 196. 
He resolves to go into the Church, 197.. Advice to him from Henley (Lord 
Northington), 197. His first Speech, 197. His sudden Success, 197. He is 
Counsel for the Defendant in a Prosecution ordered by the House of Com- 
mons, 197. His Assertion of the Right of the Jury to consider the Character of 
the Publication charged to be a Libel, 198. He obtains the Verdict in spite 
of the Judge, 198. He receives a silk Gown, 199. His Intimacy with Mr. 
Pitt, 199. Happy Period of his Life, 199. He is made Attorney-General, 
200. He is returned to Parliament for Downton, 200. His Marriage, 200. 
His Bill to amend the Habeas Corpus Act, 201. His State Prosecutions when 
Attorney-General, 201. Rex v. Hensey, for Treason, 202. The House of 

_ Lords at present in advance of the House of Commons as to legal Reform, 
202. Rex v. Shebbeare, for Libel, 202. He conducts the Prosecution against 
Lord Ferrers for Murder, 203. 


x CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER CXLIII. 


CONTINUATION OF THE LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN TILL HE RECEIVED THE GREAT SEAL. 
® 


Change of Policy at Court on the Accession of George III., 203. Pratt continues 
Attorney-General after the Resignation of Mr. Pitt, 204. He is appointed 
Chief Justice of the Common Pleas, 204. His Expectations of Repose, 204. 
He announces his constitutional Principles on a Point of Practice, 204. Im- 
prisonment of Wilkes, 205. Question of Privilege, 205. Lord Camden’s 
Judgment for liberating Wilkes, 206. Consideration of the Question of 
Privilege, 206. Lord Camden’s immense Popularity, 206. His inflamma- 
tory Language to Juries, 206. Wilkes’s Action for Damages tried before 
Lord Camden, 207. Legality of general Warrants, 207. Legality of War- 
rants to search for Papers, 207. Lord Camden’s non-political Decisions 
while Chief Justice of the Common Pleas, 208. His renown at Home and 
abroad, 209. He is raised to the Peerage, 209. His Speech on the Right 
to tax the Colonies, 209. Doubts asto the Soundness of Lord Chatham’s 
and Lord Camden’s Doctrine on this subject, 211. He supportsthe Rocking- 
ham Administration, 212. Negotiations on the breaking up of the Rocking- 
ham Administration, 212. Lord Camden agrees to accept the Great Seal, 
214. His Expectations of the new Administration, 214. Great Seal deliver- 
ed to him, 215. 


CHAPTER CXLIV. 
CONTINUATION OF THE LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN TILL HE BECAME AN EX-CHANCELLOR. 


Lord Camden as an Equity Judge, 216. His Qualifications, 216. Defective Re- 
ports of his Decisions, 216. Equitable Points decided by him, 217. Confu- 
sion produced by Lord Chatham’s Illness, 217. Character of Lord Chat- 
ham’s last Administration, 217. Order in Council prohibiting Exportation 
of Corn, 218. Lord Camden’s Doctrine of Necessity affording a legal Justi- 
fication to the Breach of an Act of Parliament, 218. His famous Expression 
of ‘‘ Forty Days’ Tyranny,’’ 218. He is severely chastised by Lord ‘Temple, 
218. Mr. Pitt disappears, 220. Passing of the Act to tax Tea, &c., imported 
into America, 220. Charles Townshend’s new Administration, 220. His 
sudden Death, 220. Duke of Grafton’s Administration, 221. Q. Expedi- 
ency of making an English lawyer Chancellor of Ireland? 221. Lord Cam- 
denon the Appointment of an Irish Chancellor, 221. Appointment of Hewitt, 
afterwards Lord Lifford, as Irish Chancellor, 224. Proposal to appoint 
English Lawyers to be Irish Judges, and Irish lawyers to be English Judges 
reciprocally, 224. Wilkes elected for Middlesex, 224. Alarm of the 
Government, 224. Lord Camden tothe Duke of Grafton, as to the Course 
to be pursued, 225. Wilkes to be expelled the House of Commons, 225. 
Lord Camden to the Duke of Grafton, objecting to this Proceeding, 226. 
Wilkes expelled, Lord Camden approving, 226. Lord Camden condemns 
all the subsequent Proceedings respecting Wilkes and the Middlesex Elec- 
tion, 226. Lord Camden to the Duke of Grafton, on the Removal of 
Lord Shelburne, 227. Same to Same on the Resignation of Lord Chat- 
ham, 227. Same to Same as to doubting whether he himself would 
resign, 228. Lord Camden remains in office under the Duke of Grafton, 
228. Dispute with America, 228. Lord Camdento the Duke of Grafton, 
recommending Conciliation, 228. Lord Camden to the Duke of Grafton in 
defence of Dunning, 230. Cabinet summoned on Wilkes’s Case, 231. Lord 
Camden to the Duke of Grafton, dissuading violent Measures, 231. Lord 
Camden, being overruled, ceases to attend Cabinet meetings respecting 
Wilkes or America, 231. Lord Chatham’s Restoration to public Life, 231. 
Lord Camden’s Explanation of his Conduct, 232. Resolution to dismiss 
Lord Camden, 232. Denunciation against every Lawyer who would agree 
to succeed him, 232. Ministerial Crisis, 233. Charles Yorke agrees to 
accept the Great Seal, 233. Lord Camden surrenders the Great Seal, 233. 
Lord Camden as a Judge of Appeal in the House of Lords, 233. Rights of 
Dissenters, 234. Rex v. Wilkes, 234. "The Douglas Cause, 234. Lord 
Camden’s Judgment, 235. Lord Camden’s Exercise of his Judicial Patron- 
age, 236. Horace Walpole’s Account of the Douglas Cause, 236. Merits of 
the Douglas Cause, 236. Letter from Lord Camden to Sir Eardley Wilmot, 
offering him the Chief Justiceship of the Common Pleas, 237. Nullum 
Tempus Act, 237. The Grenville Act, 237. 


CONTENTS. sf 


CHAPTER CXLYV. 


CONTINUATION OF THE LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN TILL HE WAS FIRST APPOINTED 
PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL. 


Lord Camden’s Vindication of his Conduct while in Office, 238. Lord Camden’s 
Opinion on the Question of the Middlesex Election, 238. His Controversy 
with Lord Mansfield respecting the Rights of Jurists on Trials for Libels. 
239. Lord Camden’s Opinion of the Royal Marriage Act, 240. His Speech 
on ‘‘Literary Property,’’ 240. Lord Camden’s Correspondence with the 
Duke of Grafton while they were opposed to each other in Politics, 241. 
Lord Camden and the Duke of Grafton co-operating in Opposition, 242. 
Lord Camden’s Views respecting the Contest with America, 242. Lord Cam- 
den’s Sentiments on the American Declaration of ‘‘ INDEPENDENCE,’’ 243. Lord 
Camden’s Despondence, 244. His Exertions in Parliament for Reconcilia- 
tion, 244. His Speech on the New England Coercion Bill, 244. His Defence 
of the Americans, 244. Lord Chatham falls senseless from his Horse, 245. 
Lord Chatham’s Recovery, and his Plans, 245. Death of Lord Chatham, 
245. His Letter giving an Account of this Event, 245. His Eulogy on Lord 
Chatham, 248. His Denunciation of the Manner in which the War was con- 
ducted, 248. Lord Camden onthe Intentions of France and Spain, 249. He 
exposes the Abuses in Greenwich Hospital, 249. Lord Camden's Effort 
to obtain Justice for Ireland, 249. He defends his Pension, 249. He recom- 
mends a new Course to be pursued by the Opposition, 249. Lord Camden’s 
Speech on the Contractors’ Bill, 250. Lord Camden’s farewell Speech on 

_ America, 251. His Speech before Lord North’s Resignation, 251. Formation 
of the Second Rockingham Administration, 252. Lord Camden President 
of the Council, 252. Thurlow remains Lord Chancellor, 252. 


CHAPTER CXLVI. 
CONTINUATION OF THE LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN TILL THE KING’S ILLNESS IN 1785. 


Lord Chancellor Thurlow opposes the Government, 253. Lord Camden’s Speech 
in favour of the *‘ Contractors’ Bill,’’ 253. Bill to declare the Legislative 
Independence of Ireland, 254. Death of Lord Rockingham, 255. Appoint- 
ment of Lord Shelburne as Prime Minister, 255. Lord Camden retains 
Office, 255. Dissensions in Lord Shelburne’s Cabinet, 256. Harmony re- 
stored, 258. Coalition between Mr. Fox and Lord North, 258. State of 
Parties immediately before the Formation of the ‘‘ Coalition Ministry,’’ 258. 
Lord Shelburne meditates a Coalition with Lord North, 258. Short Triumph 
of Mr. Fox and Lord North’s ‘ Coalition,’’ 259. Lord Camden in Opposi- 
tion, 259. Lord Camden’s Speech against Fox’s India Bill, 260. Coalition 
turned out, and Mr. Pitt Prime Minister, 260. Lord Camden for some Time 
supports him without Office, 260. Lord Camden waives his Claim to the 
Office of Lord President in favour of Lord Gower, 260. Letter from Lord 
Camden on the State of Ireland, 261. Negotiations for Lord Camden’s Re- 
turn to Office, and the Duke of Grafton to join the Administration, 261. 
Lord Camden agrees to resume Office without the Duke of Grafton, 261. 
Lord Camden’s Views in Returning to Office, 262. Law of Libel, 263. 
Lord Camden again President of the Couneil, 263. Opposition to Mr. Pitt’s 
Resolutions for allowing Free Trade with Ireland, 264. Lord Camden’s 
Speech in support of them, 264. Lord Camden supports Mr. Pitt on the 
Question of Parliamentary Reform, 265. Application to promote a Bishop, 
265. A Prime Minister’s Promise, 266. Lord Camden made an Earl, 266. 
State of Affairs till the King’s Illness, 267. 


CHAPTER CXLVII. 


CONTINUATION OF THE LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN TILL THE BREAKING OUT OF THE 
FRENCH REVOLUTION. 


Lord Camden conducts the Proceedings in the House of Lords on the King’s Iil- 
ness, 267. He moves for a Committee to search for Precedents, 268, Reso- 


= CONTENTS 


lution as to right of the two Houses of Parliament to provide for the Exercise 
of the Royal Authority, 268. Prince of Wales to be appointed Regent under 
Restrictions, 268. ‘‘ Phantom of the Great Seal,’’ 269. Parliament opened 
under a fictitious Commission, 271. Consideration of the Question how the 
Royal Authority is to be exercised on the Incapacity of the Sovereign, 271. 
Defence of Lord Camden for continuing to support Mr. Pitt, 272. Lord 
Camden’s Sentiments on the French Revolution, 273. His Letter to Mr. 
Burke, 273. 


CHAPTER CXLVIII. 
CONCLUSION OF THE LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN. 


His Services in passing the Libel Bill, 274. His Reasoning in Defence of the 
Rights of Jurors, 274. His great Speech against Lord Thurlow, 274. His 
last Words in the House of Lords, 276. Salutary Operation of the Libel 
Bill, 276. Lord Camden retires from public Life, 277. His last Letter to 
the Duke of Grafton, 277. His Death, 277. His Burial, 277. His Epitaph, 
278. His Character by Horace Walpole, 273. By another Contemporary, 
278. As a Judge, 278. As a Politician, 278. His Eloquence, 279. His 
love of Romances, 279. And of Music, 279. He slights Goldsmith, 279. 
His Intimacy with Garrick, 279. His Habits, 280. His Old Age, 280. 
Portraits of him, 280. His Descendants, 280. 


APPENDIX TO THE LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN. 


George Hardinge’s Life of Lord Camden, 284. His Acquaintance with Lord 
Northington, 284. No Assistance from Father’s Fame, 284. Chippenham 
Election Case, 285. Liberty of the Press, 285. Habeas Corpus, 285. Libel 
Act, 285. His Sense of Duty as Attorney-General, 285. Lord Ferrers’s 
Case, 285. Lord Camden’s judicial Excellence, 286. His Opinion of Lord 
Hardwicke, 286. His kind Manner of speaking of Lord Mansfield, 286. He 
is made Chief Justice of the Common Pleas against his Will, 286. His 
Judgment respecting Wilkes, 286. Inscription on his Portrait at Guildhall, 
written by Dr. Johnson, 286. Lord Camden had no personal Acquaintance 
with Wilkes, 286. Lord Camden as a Criminal Judge, 286. He disapproves 
of Acts making Forgery a capital Offence, 286. His candour, 286. His 
Manners, 286. His Merit in deciding Appeals before the Privy Council, 287. 
His Scrape in the House of Lords, in proposing that Peers should be created 
by Parliament, 287. His Opinion of Lord Shelburne, 287. Character of 
Mr. Dunning, 287. His unlucky Exit as well as Entrance in the House of 
Lords as Chancellor, 287. He takes his Seat as Chancellor in Lincoln’s Inn 
Hall, 287. The Chancery Bar, 287. His Excellency as an Equity Judge, 
287. His wonderful memory, 287. His Judgment in the Downing Case, 
288. In the Douglas Case, 288. In Shipley’s Case, 288. 


CHAPTER CXLIX. 


LIFE OF LORD CHANCELLOR CHARLES YORKE FROM HIS BIRTH TILL HE WAS 
RETURNED AS A MEMBER OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS, 


Glance at the Career of Charles Yorke, 290. Difficulties he had to struggle 
against from the Wealth and*Power of his Father, 290. His Industry and 
Energy, 290. His early Education, 290. At School, 291. At Cambridge, 
291. Advantages and Disadvantages of the Reformed System since intro- 
duced there, 291. The Athenian Letters, 291. Charles Yorke’s Contribu- 
tions to them, 291. History of the Work, 291. Praise of it by Barthélemi, 
292. Specimen,—Cleander to Hydaspes, on the Contrast between Greeks 
and Asiatics, 292. Manners of the Spartans, 293. Reference in the Athenian 
Letters to English Politics, 294. C. Yorke’s other Occupations while at 
Cambridge, 294. He takes an honorary Degree, 294. He studies the Law 
at Lincoln’s Inn, 294. He is assisted by his Father, 294. His Proficiency 
as a Law Student, 295. His Intimacy with Warburton, 295. His Letter to 
Warburton on Receiving a Copy of the Divine Legation, 295. His Inclina- 
tion to a contemplative Life, 297. He is called to the Bar, 297. His rapid 


CONTENTS. Xi 


Progress in Business, 297. Bencher of Lincoln’s Inn, 297. Treasurer, 297. 
Master of the Library, 297. His Treatise on ‘‘ Forfeitures for Treason,’’ 299. 
Wretched Quality of English Law Books, 299. Extract from Yorke’'s 
** Forfeiture for Treason,” 299. Merits ef the Question, 299. The great 
Eclat he acquired by this Publication, 300. 


CHAPTER CL. 


CONTINUATION GF THE LIFE GF LORD CHANCELLOR CHARLES YORKE TILL HE WAS 
APPOINTED SOLICITOR-GENERAL. 


Charles Yorke is returned to Parliament for Reigate, 301. Sonnet addressed to 
him on his being returned to Parliament, 361. His Maiden Speech, 301. 
He seconds the Address, 302. He defends the Provision in the Regency 
Bill by which the Princess Dowager as Regent was to be controlled by 
Council, 302. He moves the Address, 304. He defends his Father in the 
House ef Commons against Henry Fox, 304. Henry Fex’s deep Resent- 
ment against him, 305. His Speech en the Mutiny Bill, 305. He keeps up 
the Intercourse with Warburton, 306. His Description of the beauties of 
Prior Park, 306. His Advice to Warburton, 306. He procures for Warbur- 
ton the Preachership of Lincoln’s Inn, and a Prebend at Gloucester, 307. 
He patronises Hurd, who succeeds Warburton at Lincoln’s Inn, 307. His 
Correspendence with the President Montesquieu, 307. His Chambers in 
Lincoln’s Inn are burnt down, 308. His Marriage, 309. Solicitor-General 
to the Prince, 309 His Sinecure, 309. He is discontented, and meditates 
leaving the Profession of the Law, 309. On the Promotion of Murray to be 
ies Justice of the King’s Bench, Charles Yorke is made Solicitor-General, 


CHAPTER CLI. 


CONCLUSION OF THE LIFE OF LORD CHANCELLOR CHARLES YORKE. 


Charles Yorke presides at the Ceremony of Lord Mansfield taking Leave of Lin- 
coln’s Inn, when about to be made Chief Justice of the King’s Bench, 310. 
Proud day for Lincoln’s Inn, 311. Charles Yorke disappointed by Pratt 
being made Attorney-General, 311. Quiet Times at Home during Mr. 
Pitt’s Administration, 312. Charles Yorke Counsel on the Trial of Dr. Hen- 
sey, 312. Hiscelebrated Reply in Lord Ferrers’s Case, 312. His Affliction on 
the Death of his first Wife, 312. Onthe Accession of George III. Charles 
Yorke adheres to Lord Bute, 312. He ismade Attorney-General, 312. His 
Conduct as a Law Officer after Mr. Pitt’s Resignation, 312. Letter from 
Warburton to Mr. Pitt respecting Charles Yorke, 313. He resigns the office 
of Attorney-General,314. Charles Yorke in opposition, 314. He condemns 
General Warrants and the Conduct of Government respecting the Middlesex 
Election, 314. Dunning’s Attack on Lord Hardwicke and Charles Yorke, 
315. Charles Yorke’s Defence of his Father, 316. On his resigning his 
Office of Attorney-General, practises in a Stuff Gown, 316. He receives a 
Patent of Precedence, 316. Attacks upon him for accepting it, 316. Letter, 
of Single-Speech Hamilton censuring Charles Yorke, 316. Thanks to 
Charles Yorke from University of Cambridge, 317. Onthe Formation of 
the Rockingham Administration, Charles Yorke again Attorney-General. 
317. His dexterous Conduct in arguing the Writ of Error in Money v. Leach 
on General Warranis, 317. Charles Yorke resigns his Office of Attorney- 
General, 318. His Congratulation to Sir Eardley Wilmot on his being 
appointed Chief Justice of the Common Pleas, 318. Letter from Charles 
Yorke to Warburton, thanking him for a new Book, 318. His second Mar- 
riage, 319. His Villa at Highgate, 319. Letter from Warburton, giving an 
Account of his last Meeting with Charles Yorke, 319. Charles Yorke’s last 
Appearance at the Bar in the Douglas Cause, 320. Course of the Whigs, 
and Prospect of a Whig Administration, 321. Lord Camden’s Rupture with 
the Government, 321. Resolutions of the Opposition and of the Court, 321. 
Object of the Court to induce Charles Yorke to become Chancellor, 322. 
His Interview with the Duke of Grafton, 322. The Pledge given to his 
Party, 322. He refuses the Great Seal, 322. He again refuses the Great 
Seal, 322. Letter from Mr. Pitt rejoicing in his Refusal, 322. Lapse of 


xiv CONTENTS. 


Charles Yorke, 323. He attends the King’s Levée, 323. His second In- 
terview with the King, 323. He agrees to become Chancellor, 323. He is 
sworn in, 324. In going Home he calls at Lord Rockingham’s, 324. His 
sudden Death, 324. Question, Whether he committed Suicide ? 324. State- 
ment on the Subject in Junius, 325. Statement by Sir Nathaniel Wraxall, 
325. Letter on the Subject from Markland to Rowyer, 325. Horace Wal- 
pole, 325. Statement by Cooksey, 327. Statement by Belsham, 327. 
Statement in the MS. of the Duke of Grafton, 328. Contrary Circumstances 
and Statements, 330. By Adolphus, 330. Contradiction by Craddock, 331. 
Considerations on his Conduct, 332. His Character, 332. His Prose Wri- 
tings, 332. His Vers de Société, 333. His Habits, 334. His Person, 334. 
His Epitaph, 334. General Respect for his Memory, 335. His Descend- 
ants, 335. 


CHAPTER CLII. 


LIFE OF LORD CHANCELLOR BATHURST FROM HIS BIRTH TILL HE WAS MADE A PUISNE 
JUDGE. 


Advantages from the Rise of Men of Mediocrity, 336. Wonderful Elevation of 
Lord Chancellor Bathurst, 336. His Family, 337. His Father the first Lord 
Bathurst, 337. His Father’s Introduction to Sterne, 337. Pope’s Lines ad- 
dressed to the first Lord Bathurst, 338. Burke’s Allusion to him, 338. 
Birth of Henry Bathurst, 339. His Education, 339. At Lincoln’s Inn, 340. 
He is called to the Bar, 340. He is returned to Parliament for Cirencester, 
340. Dr. Johnson’s Report of his Speech on the Impressment of Seamen, 
340. His other Speeches in Parliament, 341. He conducts the Prosecution 
of Miss Blandy for the Murder of her Father, 341. His Speech in opening 
the Case to the Jury, 341. His Reply, 343. Verdict and Execution, 343. 
Bathurst’s Speech against the King, 343. He goes over to the Court and is 
made a Puisne Judge, 344. 


CHAPTER CLIII. 


CONTINUATION OF THE LIFE OF LORD BATHURST TILL HE RESIGNED THE GREAT 
SEAL, AND WAS MADE PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL. 


His Qualifications and Conduct as a Puisne Judge, 344. Difficulty of disposing 
of the Great Seal on the Death of Charles Yorke, 345. The Great Seal in 
Commission, 345. Incompetency of the Commissioners, 346. Their De- 
cision that it is unlawful to print a new Play acted on the Stage, 348. Their 
improper Reversal of a Decree which had been pronounced in favour of Lord 
Chatham, 346. Their Reversal reversed, 347. The Great Seal committed to 
the most incompetent of them, 347. Bathurst Lord Chancellor and a Peer, 
347. His Insignificance of Service to him, 347. He is installed, 347. One 
incompetent Judge better than three, 348. Lord Bathurst not so bad an 
Equity Judge, when acting single, as was expected, 348. His candour, 348. 
Sir Fletcher Norton’s Sarcasm on Lord Bathurst, 348. Lines by Sir C. H. 

«Williams, 348, Stories circulated to ridicule the Chancellor, 348. Dr. John- 
son’s Opinion on the Fitness of Chancellors for their Office, 349. Character 
of Lord Bathurst from a contemporary Work, 349. Length of his Chancellor- 
ship, 349. His Judgments, 349. He grants Injunction against the Publica- 
tion of Lord Chesterfield’s Letters, 349. In Scotch Appeals he is assisted 
by Lord Mansfield, 351. Writ of Error respecting Copyright, 351. Lord 
Bathurst presides as High Steward on the Trial of the Duchess of Kingston, 
351. His preliminary Address to her, 351. Q.as to effect of Sentence of 
Ecclesiastical Court? 352. Evidence, 352. Verdict, 352. Sentence, 352. 
Not a Law Reformer, 353. Lord Bathurst’s political Conduct while Chan- 
cellor, 353. He draws and defends the Royal Marriage Act, 353. Lord 
Bathurst gives King’s Consent to the Election of Sir Fletcher Norton as 

«Speaker of the House of Commons, 354. He supports the American Non- 
intercourse Act, 354. He introduces Bill to suspend the Habeas Corpus 
Act with respect to American Prisoners, 354. Question as to the Legality 
of raising Regiments, 355. Lord Bathurst opposes the Acknowledgment of 
American Independence, 355. His indignant Reply to Lord Effingham, 356. 


CONTENTS. 7 Sy 


Lord Bathurst opposes the Bill making a Provision ‘for the Family of Lord 
Chatham, 356. His last Speech as Chancellor in the House of Lords, 358. 
A Failure, 358. He resigns the Great Seal, 358. Reasons for it, 358. His 
Merit in patronising Sir William Jones, 359. Dedication to him of the Trans- 
lation of the Orations of Iseus, 359. Attempt to bribe the Chancellor, 359. 


CHAPTER CLIV. 


CONCLUSION OF THE LIFE OF LORD BATHURST. 


Lord Bathurst’s Conduct while President of the Council, 359. His Speech on 
Dismissal of Lord Lieutenants for their Votes in Parliament, 360, Lord 
George Gordon’s Riots, 360. Peril of the Peers, 360. Courage of Lord 
Bathurst, 361. His Speech on this Occasion, 361. His Speech against 
factious Opposition, 362. Retort upon him by the Duke of Richmond, 362. 
In carrying through a Government Bill, he is savagely attacked by Lord 
Chancellor Thurlow, 363. Fall of Lord North, 363. Lord Bathurst resigns, 
363. His subsequent Career, 364. He opposes Bill for relief of Insolvent 
Debtors, 364. His Death, 364. His Funeral, 364. His Epitaph, 364. His Cha- 
slate 364. His Descendants, 365. Apsley House built by Lord Bathurst, 


CHAPTER CLV. 


LIFE OF LORD CHANCELLOR THURLOW FROM HIS BIRTH TILL HE WAS APPOINTED 
SOLICITOR-GENERAL. 


The Author’s Arrival at a Class of Chancellors whom he has himself beheld, 
365. Thurlow in the House of Lords in the Year 1801, 365. His Dress and 
Appearance, 365. His Speech upon a Divorce Bill, 366. The Impression 
which he made, 367. Extravagantly high Opinion of himself created by 
Thurlow among his Contemporaries, 367. His Birth, 367. His Family, 367. 
His Father’s Prognostication of his Success in Life, 368. Early Prophecy 
that he would be Lord Chancellor, 368. At Scarning School, 368. His 
Verses on ‘‘ Cock-throwing,’’ 369. At Canterbury School, 370. At Caius 
College, Cambridge, 371. Charge against him of insulting the Dean, 371. 
The Dean moves for his Expulsion, 372. He is allowed to take his Name off 
the College Books, 372. Lent Term, 1751, 372. His generous Behaviour 
to the Tutor of Caius, 373. And to the Dean, 373. Thurlow a Law Student 
at the Temple, 373. He is placed as a Pupilin a Solicitor’s Office, 374. 
Account from Cowper, his Fellow Pupil, of their Idleness, 374. Thurlow’s 
Habits while keeping his ‘Terms, 374. He haunts Nando’s Coffee-house, 
375. ‘Testimony to his Industry, 375. He is called to the Bar, 376. His 
slow Progress, 376. His pecuniary Difficulties, 376. His Stratagem to find 
a Horse to ride the Circuit, 376. He gains Distinction by putting down Sir 
Fletcher Norton, 376. He is retained in the Douglas Cause, 377. He is pa- 
tronised by the Duchess of Queensberry, 378. _ She obtains a silk Gown for 
him, 379. Thurlow’s Qualifications, 379. Advantages of Self-confidence, 
379. Thurlow in his silk Gown, 380. He attaches himself to the Tories, 
380. He is returned for Tamworth, 381. Hearing of the Douglas Cause in 
the House of Lords, 381. Thurlow’s Duel with Andrew Stewart, 381. 
His maiden Speech, 382. He is appointed Solicitor-General, 382. Com- 
parison between Thurlow and Sir William Blackstone, 382. 


CHAPTER CLVI. 


CONTINUATION OF THE LIFE OF LORD THURLOW TILL HE WAS MADE LORD CHAN- 
CELLOR. 


The Solicitor-General’s Conduct in Parliament, 383. Debate on the Bill to take 
away the Attorney-General’s Right to file Criminal Informations, 383. 
Thurlow’s Speech against the Liberty of the Press, 384. He denies the 
Right of Juries to consider the Question of Libel or no Libel, 385. His 
Speech against 'l'rial by Jury, 386. Thurlow is made Attorney-General, 387. 
Mr. Attorney-General Thurlow is beaten in his Prosecution of the Printer of 


XVi 


con 


CONTENTS. 


Junius’s Letters, 387. Case of Brass Crosby and Alderman Oliver for 
committing the Messenger of the House of Commons, 388. Thurlow’s 
furious Speech against them, 388. He is chastised by Dunning, 388. Thur- 
low’s Speech against Lord Clive, 389. His first Encounter with Horne 
Tooke : he is defeated, 390. Thurlow opposes the Grenville Act, 390. His 
Attack on Authors and Booksellers, 390. His yiolent Hatred of the Ameri- 
cans, 391. His offensive Assertion of the Right to tax Americans, 391. He 
justifies the Appellation of ‘‘ Rebels,’’ applied to the Americans, 391. His 
Assertion that ‘‘he left the lawyer in Westminster Hall,’’ 392. He main- 
tains the Right to Repeal all the Charters granted to America, 392. His 
Doctrine that ‘‘ Treason and Rebellion were the natural Growth of America,’”’ 
392. Thurlow is defeated in his Attack on Sir Fletcher Norton, Speaker of 
the House of Commons, 393. ‘Thurlow placed in a ludicrous Position in the 
House of Commons, and once for a moment abashed, 393. He is disposed to 
give some Relief to the Roman Catholics, 394. His Argument on the Gre- 
nada Case, 394. ‘Trial of the Duchess of Kingston, 395. Thurlow on the 
Effect of the Sentence of the Ecclesiastical Court, 395. His Speech on the 
Merits of the Case, 395. He prosecutes Horne Tooke for a Libel, 397. His 
Speech in Aggravation of Punishment, urging that Horne Tooke should be 
set in the Pillory, 397. Difficulty to account for Thurlow’s House of Com- 
mons’ Reputation, 398. Gibbon’s Account of him and Wedderburn, 398. 
Thurlow Chancellor, 399. 


CHAPTER CLVII. 


TINUATION OF THE LIFE OF LORD THURLOW TILL THE RESIGNATION OF LORD 
NORTH AND THE FORMATION OF THE SECOND ROCKINGHAM ADMINISTRATION. 


Thurlow installed as Lord Chancellor, 399. Cowper’s Verses addressed to him 


on this Occasion, 400. Thurlow’s Qualifications as an Equity Judge, 400. 
His Want of Industry, 400. Indifferent about Law Reform, 400. Assisted 
by Hargrave, 401. Employs Mr. Justice, Buller to sit for him in the Court 
of Chancery, 401. Ni¢knames given to him, 401. His Habit of swearing 
on the Bench, 401. Q. Are Resignation Bonds simoniacal? 401. Con- 
structive Presence of a Testator when Will is subscribed by Witnesses, 402. 
Money Land and Land Money, 402. Origin of the Fortune of Lord Eldon, 
402. Erroneous Decision of-Thurlow in Newman v. Wallis, 403. Lady 
Strathmore v. Bowes, 403. First Opera House Case, 403. A written Judg- 
ment delivered by Thurlow, supposed to be the Composition of Hargrave, 
404. Complaints of Delays in the Court of Chancery, 405. Lord Thurlow’s 
Decisions in the House of Lords, 405.. His famous Decision in Bruce v. 
Bruce, laying down the Rule with respect to Domicile and the Succession 
to Personal Property, 405. Thurlow takes his Seat in the House of Lords, 
406. His furious Maiden Speech, 407. His Demeanour on the Woolsack, 408. 
Thurlow about to lose his Authority in the House, when he is attacked by 
the Duke of Richmond, 408. Butler’s Account of this Scene, 409. Thur- 
low’s Speech against the Duke of Richmond, 409. Thurlow becomes the 
Tyrant of the House of Peers, 409. Thurlow’s ironical Defence of the Bill 
to punish Adultery, 410. His Opposition to Lord Shelburne’s Resolution in 
favour of Irish Commerce, 411. He attacks Lord Rockingham’s Motion for 
an Address praying for a Change of Ministers as unconstitutional, 411. He 
opposes all economical Reforms, 411. He ably defends the Employment of 
the Military to put down Lord George Gordon’s Riots, 411. Challenge to 
fight between two Peers, voted a Breach of Privilege, 412. His Speech on 
the Rupture with Holland, 412. He defends the Execution of a British 
Officer taken fighting with the Americans, &c.413. The Elevation of Lord 
George Germaine to the Peerage, 413. Public Disasters, and approaching 


Fall of Lord North, 413. Speculations as to Thurlow’s Successor, 413. 
Thurlow himself remains Chancellor, 413. 


CHAPTER CLVIII. 


CONTINUATION OF THE LIFE OF LORD THURLOW TILL HE WAS DEPRIVED OF THE 


GREAT SEAL ON THE FORMATION OF THE COALITION MINISTRY. 


Blunder committed in allowing Thurlow to be Chancellor under the Rockingham 


CONTENTS. th 


Administration, 414. Explanation of this Fact, 415. Thurlow in the Rock- 
ingham Cabinet, 415. 'The Lord Chancellor Leader of the Opposition, 415. 
Mr. W. Pitt’s Motion for Parliamentary Reform, 415. Thurlow opposes the 
‘* Contractors’ Bill,’’ 415. And opposes the ‘‘ Revenue Officers’ Disqualifica- 
tion Bill,’’ 417. He opposes the Bill for disfranchising Cricklade, 417. He 
brings down a Censure on all Law Lords, 418. He opposes a ministerial 
Address to the Crown, 418. Death of the Marguis of Rockingham, 418. 
Thurlow opposes Mr. Burke’s Bill for economical Reform, 418. Lord Shel- 
burne Prime Minister, 419. Resignation of Mr. Fox and the Rockingham 
Whigs, 419. Mr. W. Pitt’s first Introduction to Office, 420. Thurlow re- 
mains Chancellor, and supports the Government, 420. Q. Whether the 
King can yield up to a foreign State part ofthe British Dominions without 
the Authority of Parliament? 420. Thurlow’s Assertion that he may, 420. 
Marvellous Effect of big Words, 421. Coalition Ministry, 421. Examina- 
tion of the Question whether Mr. Fox wished Thurlow to continue Chan- 
eellor, 421. Lord Eldon’s Story on this Subject shown to be inaccurate, 
422. Mr. Fox’s Refusal to allow Thurlow to continue Chancellor, 423 
The Great Seal in Commission, 423. 


CHAPTER CLIX. 


CONTINUATION OF THE LIFE OF LORD THURLOW TILL THE KING’S ILLNESS IN 1788. 


Thurlow and King George III. in opposition, 423. Their Tactics, 424. Thur- 
low’s Attack on the Bill to acknowledge the judicial Independence of Ire- 
land, 424. Thurlow in opposition becomes a Reformer, 425. Fox’s India 
Bill brought up from the Commons, 426. It is attacked by Thurlow on the 
first Reading, 426. Itisdefended by Lord Loughborough, 426. ‘Thurlow’s 
Reply, 426. Rejection of Fox’s India Bill, 427. Dismissal of the Coali- 
tion Ministry, 427. Mr. Pitt Prime Minister, 427. Thurlow again 
Chancellor, 427. Justification of George III. and Thurlow for their con- 
duct in opposing the Coalition Ministry, 422. Scene when Wedder- 
burn, First Commissioner of the Great Seal, delivered it up to Thurlow as 
Chancellor, 428. Majority in the Lords for Mr. Pitt, 428. Tranquillity 
there, 428. Debate in the Lords on the Resolutions of the Commons against 
the new Ministry, 429. The Great Seal stolen, 429. The Whigs suspected 
of the Theft, 430. Real History of this Affair, 430. Order in Council ‘for 
making a new Great Seal, 430. ‘Order in Council for the Use of the new 
Great Seal, 431. Great Seal again changed, 431. Prorogation and Dissolu- 
tion of Parliament, 431. Lines in the Rolliad on Thurlow with reference 
to the Stealing of the Great Seal, 431. Triumph of Mr. Pit. on the Appeal 
to the People, 432. Calm in the House of Lords, 432. Feeble Opposition 
to Mr. Pitt’s India Bill, 432. Thurlow opposes a Government Bill respect- 
ing the forfeited Estates in Scotland, 433. ‘Thurlow supports the Resolutions 
for Free trade with Ireland, 434. Recipe for making a Chancellor, 434, M. 
de Vergennes’ Treaty defended by Thurlow, 434. His Quarrel with Lord 
Shelburne, 435. Thurlow overruled on a Question respecting the Scotch 
Peerage, 435. Thurlow throws out Bill for Relief of Insolvent Debtors, 436. 
His Speech in support of Imprisonment for Debt, 436. Site of the Fleet 
Prison a Central Railway Station for the Metropolis, 436. Impeachment of 
Warren Hastings, 436. History of it, 437. Hastings bailed by the House of 
Lords, 438. His Trial in Westminster Hall, 438. Description of the Scene, 
438. Thurlow’s Address to Hastings on his Arraignment, 439. Miss Bur- 
ney’s Account of it, 439. “Question asto the mode in which the Trial should 
be conducted, 439. Thurlow’s Opinion of Pym and Lord Strafford, 440. 
Thurlow and the African Slave Trade,—change of public Sentiment on this 
Subject, 440. Billto mitigate the Horrors of the ‘‘ Middle Passage,’ 441. 
Opposed by Thurlow, 441. The Bill is carried, 441. 


CHAPTER CLX. 


CONTINUATION OF THE LIFE OF LORD THURLOW TILL HE WAS FINALLY DISMISSED 
FROM THE OFFICE OF CHANCELLOR. 


The King’s Illness, 442. Course taken by Mr. Pitt, 442. Perplexity of the 
Lord Chancellor, 443. His Intrigues with Carlton House, 443. Bargain 
2 


VOL, V. 


aaa CONTENTS 


that, in consideration of his continuing Chancellor, he should support the 
Right of the Prince of Wales to be Regent without Restrictions, 444. Mr. 
Fox arrives from Italy, 444, His Letter to Sheridan, reluctantly acquiescing 
in this Arrangement, 444. Letter of Remonstrance from Lord Loughborough 
to Sheridan, 444. Mr. Pitt discovers Thurlow’s Duplicity, 446. Story of 
Thurlow being betrayed by his Hat, 446. Mr. Pitt withdraws all Confidence 
from Thurlow, and employs Lord Camden to carry through the Measures 
for a Regency, 446. Debate on Lord Camden’s Motion for a Committee to 
search for Precedents, 447. Lord Thurlow’s Temporising Speech, 447. 
Information to Lord Thurlow of the King’s probable Recovery, 447. Thur- 
low’s Imprecation upon. himself if he should forget his Sovereign, 448. 
Wilkes’s Retort, 448. Thurlow’s Attack on Lord Loughborough for sup- 
porting the Rights of the Prin@e, 448. Expedient of using the Great Seal 
without the King’s Authority, 449. Letter of Thanks from Queen Char- 
lotte to Thurlow, 450. Thurlow again in Tears, 451. Thurlow’s great 
Popularity for his loyal Attachment to his Master, 452. Sarcasms thrown 
out against him, 452. Burke’s Attack upon him in the House of Commons, 
452. Burke’s Caricature of Thurlow, 452. Disappointment of the Whigs 
by the King’s Recovery, 452. Parliament regularly opened under a Com- 
mission by the King’s Authority, 453..Thurlow’s Reputation injured with 
the Public, 453. His Hatred of Mr. Pitt, 453. Mr. Pitt’s Representation 
to the King as to Thurlow’s Conduct, 453. Thurlow’s Conduct for the next 
three Years, 454. Thurlow displaced from his Position as Organ of the’ 
Government in the House of Lords, 455. Lord Grenville substituted for 
him, 455. Debate on the Russian Armament, 455. Earliest notice in Par- 
liament of the French Revolution, 456. Speech by Lord Loughborough in 
praise of it, 456. Thurlow’s Defence of the Russian Armament, 456. His 
Abuse of the French Revolution, 456. Q. Whether Hastings’s Impeach- 
ment was abated by the Dissolution of Parliament, 456. Thurlow throws 
out Mr. Fox’s Libel Bill, 457. The last Session of Parliament in which he 
sat as Chancellor, 457. Difficulty of understanding his Views and Objects, 
457. He opposes Mr. Pitt’s Bill for establishing the Sinking Fund, 458. 
Mr. Pitt insists on his Dismissal, 459. Mr. Pitt’s Letter to him, 459. 
Lord North’s Sagacity in foreseeing the Dismissal of Thurlow, 459. Thur- 
low dismissed, 459. T’hurlow’s Indignation against the King, 459. Arrange- 
ment that he should continue Chancellor tillthe End of the Session, 459. 
He tries to set the King against Mr. Pitt, 460. His Attempt fails, 460. Jus- 
tification of the King for taking part against Thurlow, 460. Thurlow defends 
the Slave Trade, 460. He unsuccessfully opposes Fox’s Libel Bill, 461. 
His Protest against it, 461. Last Day of the Session, 461. Thurlow’s last 
Day in Office, 461. His Mortification in hearing the Speaker and the King 
praise the Measures he had opposed, 461. He surrenders the Great Seal, 
461. His desolate Condition, 462. His advice to Sir John Scott, 462. 


CHAPTER CLXI, 


CONCLUSION OF THE LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 


What was in Thurlow’s power after his Loss of Office, 462. His inadequate 
Performance, 463. His Habits in retirement, 463. His Demeanour in the 
House of Lords, 463. Progress of Hastings’s Trial, 464._ Thurlow complains 
of a Report of a Committee of the House of Commons, drawn up by Burke, 
as a Libel, 464. Burke’s Revenge upon him, 464. Conclusion of Hastings’s 
Trial, 465. _Thurlow’s Speech in favour of Hastings, 465. Acquittal of 
Hastings, 465. ‘Thurlow in Opposition, 465. Thurlow a Partisan of the 
Prince of Wales, 466. Thurlow again ‘‘a Patriot,’ 466. He opposes the 
‘« Treason and Sedition Bills,’’ 466. Thurlow follows the Example of the 
Whigs, and secedes from Parliament, 468. Projected new Administration, 
with Thurlow as Chancellor, 468. The Plan proves abortive, 469. Thurlow 
abandons public Life, 469. He maintains the Equality of all Peers, 469. 
His Defence of Slavery, 470. His Appearance in the House of Lords in 
1801, 470. His Delight upon the Resignation of Pitt, 470. He opposes the 
Bill for indemnifying the late Ministers, 470. He opposes the Billto prevent 
Horne Tooke from sitting in the House of Commons, 470. Account of the 


CONTENTS, xix 


Formation of his Intimacy with Horne Tooke, 471. Thurlow’s Visits to 
Horne Tooke at Wimbledon, 471. Thurlow’s. Speech upon Clergymen 
being excluded from the House of Commons, 472. Thurlow’s last Speech 
in Parliament on the Peace of Amiens, 472. His final Retreat into private 
Life, 473. He is consulted respecting the Charges agamst the Princess of 
Wales, 473. Extract from Sir S. Romilly’s Diary, on this Subject, 473. 
Creevery’s Account of Thurlow at Brighthelmstone, 474. Jerningham’s 
Account of Thurlow at Brighthelmstone, 474. The Year 1806 fatal to great 
Men, 477. Death of Pitt and Fox, 477. Death of Thurlow, 477. Sensation 
produced by his Death, 477. His Funeral, 477. Character of Sir William 
Follett, 478. His Epitaph, 479. His Defects as a Judge, 479. His Rude- 
ness to the Bar and to Solicitors, 479. His Enmity to Law Reform, 480. 
His Conduct as a Statesman, 480. His Judicial Patronage, 480. His 
Ecclesiastical Appointment, 481. His Kindness to a Curate, 481. His 
Oratory, 481. Unscrupulous Advantage taken by him of the Ignorance of 
his Audience, 482. Lord Brougham’s Description of his Manner of speakng 
in the House of Lords, 482. Another Description of him by Butler, 482. 
Thurlow never an Author, 483. His classical Taste cultivated by him in 
Retirement, 483. Translation by him from Euripides, 484. His Translation 
of the ‘‘ Battle of the Frogs and the Mice,’’ 485. His Love of Novels, 486. 
His great Powers of Conversation, 486. Lord Thurlow’s ‘‘ Sittings,’’ 486. 
The Chancellor and the Prime Minister, when tipsy, mistaken for Highway- 
men, and fired at, 487. Thurlow’s sayings, 487. Thurlow’s Treatment of 
Cowper, 488. Cowper’s Letter to Thurlow, with a Copy of his Poems, 489. 
Thurlow’s early Promise to provide for Cowper whenhe became Chancellor, 
490. Cowper, though neglected, still attached to Thurlow, 490. Thurlow’s 
Admiration of Hayley, 491. Hayley’s Account of Thurlow’s Kindness to 
him, 491. Correspondence between Thurlow and Cowper respecting the 
Translation of Homer into blank Verse, 492. ‘Thurlow’s meritorious Effort 
to assist Dr. Johnson, 494. Dr. Johnson’s Letter to Thurlow, 495. Thur- 
low’s Generosity to Crabbe, 495. Thurlow, when a Young Man, crossed in 
Love, 496. When Lord Chancellor, with little Censure from the World, he 
openly kept a Mistress, 496. Improved Morals of Lawyers, 496. His kind- 
ness to his Children, 496. Justification of Thurlow from the Charge of 
Scepticism, 497. Burke’s unfair Sarcasm on Thurlow’s Irreligion, 497. 
Thurlow naturally tender-hearted, 498. Letter from him on the Death of 
his Sister, 498. His kindness to his Brothers, 499. His Person and Man- 
ners, 499. The late Lord Holland’s Memory of him, 499. His Good- 
humour in private Life, 499. His occasional Vulgarity, 500. His Saying to 
a Deputation of Presbyterians, 500. His Advice to George III. about siving 
the Royal Assent to Bills, 500. His Speech when the Prince of Wales took 
the Pas of him, 500. His Answer when the Prince invited him to Dinner, 
501. Difference with the Prince about giving him Advice, 501. Habit of 
profane swearing, 501. His Quarrel with Holland, the Architect, 501. 
Thurlow’s great Merit, 502. Contemporary Character of him while he was 
Attorney-General, 502. Character of him by Bishop Watson, 502, By Sir 
Nathaniel Wraxall, 503. By Bishop Horsley, 504. By Dr. Parr, 504. By 
Peter Pindar, 505. By a surviving Relative, 506. ‘I’hurlow’s probationary 
Ode in the ‘‘ Rolliad,’’ 507. Descent of his Honours, 509. Regret that he 


fa not write his own Life, 509. Extracts from MS. Journal of Lord Kenyon, 


. ae 
we 
Teieiheit 


aN PerNS 
2 ATE se ‘ 


“wy Cys © POT 
‘pct Ons, 


phy a 7 

J P 
Soy > ee i — 
bse apie tres 
eh Mw 





LIVES 


OF THE 


LORD CHANCELLORS OF ENGLAND. 


CHAPTER CXXIX, 


LIFE OF LORD CHANCELLOR HARDWICKE FROM HIS BIRTH TILL HE 
WAS APPOINTED ATTORNEY-GENERAL. 


WE now come to the man universally and deservedly considered the 
most consummate judge who ever sat in the Court of Chancery—being 
distinguished not only for his rapid and satisfactory decision of the 
causes which came before him, but for the profound and enlightened 
principles which he laid down, and for perfecting English Equity into 
a symmetrical science. He is at the same time to be honoured as a 
considerable statesman, co-operating powerfully for some years with the 
shrewdest minister this country produced during the eighteenth century, 
and after the fall of that chief, being the principal support of his feeble 
successors in times perilous to the national independence, and to the 
reigning dynasty. 

Yet the task of his biographer is by no meanseasy. Though he 
never said or did a foolish thing, he is not to be regarded with un- 
mixed admiration. There were shades on his reputation which ought 
to be delineated. Personally, he does not much excite our interest or 
our sympathy. His career is not checkered by any youthful indis- 
cretions or generous errors. He ever had a keen and steady eye to his 
own advantage, as well as to the public good. Amidst the aristocratic 
connexions which he formed, he forgot the companions of his youth ; 
and his regard for the middle classes of society from which he sprung, 
cooled down to indifference. He became jealous of all who could be 
his rivals for power, and he contracted a certain degree of selfishness 
and hardness of character, which excited much envy and ill will 
amidst the flatteries which surrounded him. To do justice to the 
qualities and actions of so extraordinary a person would require powers 
of discrimination and delineation, which I greatly fear 1 do not possess, 
However, after bespeaking the indulgence of my readers, I proceed,— 
resolved not to be sparing of praise, nor to shrink from censure, when 
I think the one or the other is deserved. 

VOL. V. 3 


34 LIFE OF 


It is curious to observe, that the three greatest Chancellors after the 
Revolution were the sons of attorneys, and that two of them had not 
the advantage of a university education. The illustrious Earl of Hard- 
wicke was the son of a small attorney at Dover, of respectable cha- 
racter, but in very narrow circumstances. ‘The family, though much 
reduced in the seventeenth century, is said anciently to have held con- 
siderable possessions in Wiltshire, of which county Thomas Yorke was 
thrice High Sheriff in the reign of Henry VIII. Philip, the father, was 
married to Elizabeth, daughter and coheir of Richard Gibbon of Rol- 
venden, in Kent.* They had three children who grew up—two 
daughters and a son. They were glad to marry one daughter to a 
dissenting minister, and the other to a tradesman in a country town, 

Philip the son, the subject of this memoir, was born at Dover on the 
first day of December, 1690. He never was at any school except a 
private one, kept at Bethnal Green by a Dissenter, of the name of 
Samuel Morland, who is said to have been an excellent teacher. Here 
he won the good opinion of this worthy pedagogue, by displaying the 
quickness of parts and opps application which afterwards distinguished 
him through life. 

When he had reached the age of fourteen, being noted as a “cute 
lad,” the father desired that he should be bred to his own profession of 
an attorney ; but the mother, who was a rigid Presbyterian, very much 
opposed this plan. She expressed a strong wish “that Philip should 
be put apprentice to some honester trade ;” and sometimes she declared 


* Gibbon, the historian, being of this family, has given us a very pompous ac- 
count of it~showing how, being settled in “the great forest of Anderida,” now the 
Weald of Kent, they, in 1326, possessed lands which still belong to them; ; that one 
of them was “ Marmorarius, ” or architect to Edward III.; that they had for arms 
‘“‘a lion rampant gardant, between three schallop-shells, argent on a field azure; 
and that they were allied to Jack Cade’s Lord Say and Seale, “who had most 
traitorously corrupted the youth of the realm in erecting a grammar-school, who 
had caused printing to be used, and, contrary to the King, his crown, and dignity, 
had built a paper-mill,—talking of a noun and a verb, and such abominable words 
as no Christian can endure to hear.””—Mise. Works, i. 4, 

Lord Hardwicke, when Chancellor, erected a monument to his father and mother, 
with the arms of York and of Gibbon impaled upon it, and with the following simple 
inscription, which he composed : 

“ Here lieth the body of Puitir Yorke, Gent., 
who married Elizabeth, the only child 
of Richard Gibbon, Gent. 
They had issue 
three sons and six daughters, 
of whom one son and two daughters are surviving. 
The other six are buried near this place. 

He died June 18th, 1721, in the 70th year of his age: 
Here lieth also the body of the said Exizanern, 
Wife of the above-mentioned Philip Yorke, 
who died October 17th, 1727, in the 69th year of her age. 
QUOS AMOR IN VITA CONJUNXIT 
NON IPSA MORS DIVISIT, 

The Gibbon arms are quartered in the Chancellor’s shield in Temple hall, and in 
Charles Yorke’s in Lincoln’s Inn Hall. 


LORD HARDWICKE, 35 


her ambition to be that, breeding him a parson in her own religious 
persuasion, ‘she might see his head wag in the pulpit.” However, 
her consent to Philip’s legal destination was at last obtained on an offer 
being received from Mr, Salkeld, a very eminent London attorney, who 
had been many years Mr. Yorke’s town agent, to take the boy as 
articled clerk without a fee.* 

Philip Yorke, when transferred to the metropolis, exhibited a rare 
instance of great natural abilities, joined with an early resolution to rise 
in the world, supported by acquired good habits, and aided by singular 
good luck. A desk being assigned to him in Mr, Salkeld’s office, in 
Brooke Street, Holborn, he applied to business with the most extra- 
ordinary assiduity, and, at the same time, he employed every leisure 
moment in endeavouring to supply the defects of his limited education. 
All lawyer’s clerks were then obliged in a certain degree to understand 
Latin, in which many law proceedings were carried on; but he, not 
contented with being able to construe the ‘“ Chirograph of a fine,”t or 
to draw a “ Nar,’t took delight in perusing Virgil and Cicero, and 
made himself well acquainted with the other more popular Roman 
classics, though he never mastered the minutice of Latin prosody, and 
for fear of a false quantity, ventured with fear and trembling on a Latin 
quotation. Greek he hardly affected to be acquainted with. 

“‘ By these means he gained the entire good will and esteem of his 
master; who observing in him abilities and application that prognosticated 
his future eminence, entered him as a student in the Temple,§ and 
suffered him to dine in the Hall during the terms. But his mistress, a 
notable woman, thinking she might take such liberties with a grates 
clerk, used frequently to send him from his business on family errands, 
and to fetch in little necessaries from Covent Garden and other markets. 
This, when he became a favourite with his master, and intrusted with 
his business and cash, he thought an indignity, and got rid of it by a 
stratagem, which prevented complaints or expostulation. Jn his ac- 
counts with his master, there frequently occurred, ‘ coach-hire for roots 
of celery and turnips from Covent Garden, and a barrel of oysters 
from the fishmonger’s, §-c.,” which Mr. Salkeld observing, and urging 
on his wife the impropriety and ill housewifery of such a practice, put 
an end to it.”’|| 


* The “ Biographia Britannica” confounds this Mr. Salkeld with Serjeant Salkeld, 
author of the well-known “ Reports,” and erroneously supposes that Philip Yorke 
was sent to the Serjeant as a pupil when destined for the bar. 

+ The record of a fictitious suit, resorted to for the purpose of docking estates tail 
and quieting the title to lands. 

t Familiar contraction of “ Narratio,” the “ Declaration,” or statement of the 
plaintiff’s grievance or cause of action. 

“ Novembris 29°. 17089, 
die et anno p'dict. 

M' Philippus Yorke filius et heres apparens Philippi Yorke de villa 
et port de Dover in Com. Kant, gen. admissus est in Societatem Medij € o4 go 00: 
Templi spealiter et obligatur una cum - ; 5 : ‘ : 

/ Et dat per fine - - - : 2 
—Books of Middle Temple. 


|| Letter to Cooksey from “old man of the law, who knew him well.”—Cooksey, p. 71. 


36 LIFE OF 


There were at the same time in Mr. Salkeld’s office several young 
gentlemen of good family and connexions, who had been sent there to 
be initiated in the practical part of the law,—Mr. Parker, afterwards 
Chief Baron of the Exchequer, Mr. Jocelyn, afterwards Lord Chancel- 
lor of Ireland, and Mr. Strange, afterwards Sir John Strange, Master of 
the Rolls. With these, Philip Yorke, though an articled clerk, associa- 
ted on terms of perfect equality, and they had the merit of discovering 
and encouraging his good qualities. 

He now received from time tatime Latin letters from his former pre- 
ceptor, to encourage him in his career, and to give him the news of 


Bethnal Green. In one of these, Morland, after dwelling with com- 


placency on the talents of his pupil, confidently predicts the youth’s 
future celebrity, and pronounces that to have been the most auspicious 
day of his life when the cultivation of so happy a genius was first com- 
mitted to his charge :—‘t Non mirandum est si futuram tui nominis ce- 
lebritatem meus preesagiat animus. Quas tantopere olim vices meas 
dolui, eas hodie gratulor mihi plurimum, cui tale tandem contigerit in- 
genium excolendum. Nullum unquam diem gratiorem mihi illuxisse in 
perpetuum reputabo, quam quo te pater tuus mihi tradidit in discipli- 
nam,”* 


* There are two of Morland’s Letters to Yorke preserved in the British Museum, 
and I think they are worthy of being copied at length. 


“ Juveni Prestantissimo Puitipro Yorkio, 8. P. D. 
Samuert Mortanpvs. 


“Cum non alia potior se mihi sisteret ratio, qua demonstrarem tibi, quantis me 
perfuderint gaudiis, et intima quasi pertentarint Precordia jucundissime tue, quibus 
me nuper beasti Liters, quam si celeriter rescriberem; Vix lecto egressus Calamum 
in manus arripui, quem nulla ingruentium Curarum vi et impetu prins excutiendum 
statui, quam responsum tibi quale quale exaravero: Quas tantopere olim vices meas 
dolui, eas hodie gratulor mihi plurimum, cui tale tandem contigerit ingenium 
excolendum. Nullum unquam diem gratiorem mihi illuxisse in perpetuum reputabo, 
quam quo te Pater tuus mihi tradidit in Disciplinam, Cui quanta insit Virtutis 
Indoles, quam inexplebilis bonarum Litcrarum sitis, quantum Ingenii acumen, cum 
Nemini magis perspectum sit quam mihi, non mirandum est, si futuram tui nominis 
celebritatem, meus presagiat animus; nec fieri potest, quin tam raras optimi 
Adolescentis dotes depeream. ‘Tum demum mihi placere videor, cum dulcissimam 
Dierum illorum memoriam revoco, quibus Musis, et Apolline multo, (quippe qui a 
Latere tuo nunquam se divelli patientur,) studia liberaliora, et amcniora simul 
tractavimus, lisque artibus et Disciplinis instruendas mentes curavimus, quibus 
instructi paratiores habilioresque ad res tum Privatas administrandas accedimus. 
Adest tamen mihi Voluptas nec minus viridis, cum ad ea Tempora presensione 
quadam provolat Animus, quibus eos honores consecutus fueris et ad ea Munia 
admotus, quibus certissimum aditum merita tua aperient munientque; quibus nos 
etiam feremur inter eos fuisse, qui pro Mediocritate nostra contulimus aliquid, vel 
contulisse voluimus ad Juventutem tuam elegantioribus Literis imbuendam. Hec 
non ita accepta velim, ut non amplius tibi studiis operam dandam credas, que jam 
acrius certe urgenda impellendaque existimo, si ad Lucem, et famam hominum 
profluere satagis. Caveas, oportet, ne remissis parum tempestive Laboribus, ex ipso, 
quem jam tenebas quasi portu, in altum rejectus pereas; ne flavescentibus ad 
Messem Campis, Torpore correptus, abjectaque, que sola restat, demetendi et in 
Horreum colligendi cura, nullos tandem Lucubrationum tuarum fructus percipias. 
Ita comparatum est, ut in Adificiis extruendis, ita etiam in studiis excolendis, ut 
que nondum perfecta et sarta tecta, ut ita dicam, relinquis, sponte dilabantur 
quotidie, et in pejus ruant. Quanto minimo, demum, citra Portum Intervalio 


LORD HARDWICKE, 37 


But the young man still had to struggle with many difficulties, and he 
probably would have been obliged from penury to go upon the roll of 
attorneys, rising only to be clerk to the magistrates at petty sessions, or 


consistas, precipue cum adverso flumine nitaris, ad Locum, ex quo solvisti, statim 
referere; nec Portum attingere licebit, priusquam spatia omnia illa, affectis jam 
Viribus, et convulsis forsitan navigii compagibus, remensus fueris. 

“Jampridem vides, Juvenis prestantissime, de Venia illa, quam narras, impe- 
tranda, non amplius tibi laborandum esse. Quantecunque demum fuissent animi 
nostri offensiones, que nulla quidem fuerunt, eas omnes detersisset lepidissima tua 
Epistola, qaam quoties lego (lego autem sepissime) toties accensas, et in majus 
auctas sentio amoris illius flammas, quo te semper prosecutus sum: toties affec- 
tuum tuorum, quibus me complecti dignaris, fervoribus admotus, refici mihi, et 
mirificé levari videor, 

“ De rebus Publicis nihil accepi dignum, quod tecum communicarem. Hagdonia, 
proba illa vetula, quam noveras, ante octiduum ad plures ivit. Robertsii, vicini 
nostri, Filiam natu maximam Vinculis matrimonialibus intra breve illigandam 
ferunt. Non est e Pygmeorum Gente ille, quem Maritum sibi adscire voluit Puella 
illa primaria, licet nondum ad novempedalem altitudinem se extendat statura, qualem 
Nummulo parvulo a spectatore singulo solvendo ostendi dicunt his Diebus Londini. 
Robertsie Procus Faringdon appellatur, Mortonii uxoris Frater. 

‘‘Nondum mihi contigit videre, quam peritum se, et strenuum oratorem prestiterit 
Oxoniensis ille, qui Malburij Laudes e Rostris primum apud suos pronuntiatas 
jam Typis evulgavit. Sed nisi madida sit mihi memoria, leva quedam ominata est 
mea mens, cum Titulum legerem in Diurnis exscriptum. Cum primum accuratius 
excussero, te imprimis participem faciam mei Judicii, et literis exponam, quantum 
insit faring purioris, quantum furfuris Chartulis istis inspersum sit, ex nostra 
sententia. 

“Vides quam amicé tecum agam, quamque te. mihi unicum amicum, et habeam, 
et gratulor, qui nullum tecum loquendi finem faciam. Hoc yerissime dixero me 
nunquam tantum Latini sermonis una vice, et currente calamo de tota mea 
vita illusisse chartis. Sed eo libentius indulsi et dextree mew et penne sua sponte 
properantibus, ut exemplo meo te hortarer, et excitarem ad crebras literas, et longas 
etiam ad me mittendas (ut prolixe sint non timendum est, cum id nec per me nec 
per te quidem licebit). 

“ Ashleius, Papilio, Johnidius, dulcissima capita, tuis vestigiis insistentes, et ad 
altiora semper aspirantes, te officiosissime resalutant. Nihil restat, nisi scias velim, 
me Deum quotidie venerari suppliciter et flexis genibus, ut te ab omni tum corporis, 
tum mentis Labe sospitem priestet et tueatur; ut studiorum tuornm inceptorumque 
omnium Ducem Auspicemque se prestare dignetur. Vale, et nt ayarety diarénts. 
Dat. ex Aidibus Blinbeggarianis im. Non. Febr. Anno a Nato Xt°, MDCCVI. 

“Salutem dicas velim Patri Matrique optimis, Sphalmata, leviora illa quidem, 
que tibi inopinanti excidisse videntur, proximis meis indicabo, que nisi per te 
steterit, non dia morabuntur.” 


“ Puitiero Yorxio suo S, P. D. Samuet Mortanpvs. 


“Cum nullas 4 Nobis feriantibus nuper, et ab Herculeis plane, quibus ceteroquin 
distendor laboribus interquiescentibus literas acceperis; vix recusandum est, quin 
me in amicis colendis parum diligentem habeas. Quinetiam Falsi me reum peragis, 
idque Syngrapha etiam, cum manu mea scriptum possides, quo mecum apud 
Judicem agas, et omnes mei defendendi rationes extorqueas. Miss4 ergo criminis 
diluendi cura, et repudiato negotiorum Patrocinio, ad Humanitatem tuam tanquam 
ad Asylum confugio. Nec ab illa tamen, nisi eximiam esse scirem, et cateroruim 
Hominum modulum supergressam, me Veniam covsecuturnm sperarem. Nescio 
certe, an recriminando effecturus sim, ut te mihi equiorem Judicem prestes. Sed 
cum non solum centis Viminibus, sed asperrimis etiam senticetis manum injiciunt, 
quibus demergendis non alia enatandi spes ostensa est ; ego etiam ad conquerendas 
injurias me confero. Scias ergo velim me graviter tulisse, quod Rus te furtim sub- 


38 LIFE OF 


perhaps to the dignity of town clerk of Dover, had it not been for his 
accidental introduction to Lord Chief Justice Parker, which was the 
foundation of all his prosperity and greatness, This distinguished Judge 
had a high opinion of Mr. Salkeld, who was respected by all ranks of 
the profession, and asked him one day if he could tell him ofa decent and 


duxisti, precipué vero, quod effigie tua manu Periti alicujus expressa, non prius 
impertire dignatus es, ut quoties eam usurparem oculis, mentem meam non minus 
tui Desiderio, quam densis Curarum agminibus acerbatam solarer aut lenirem. 

“Ineptire tibi forsan videbor, si piguiores nos factos ad scribendi officia Carriani 
operis expectatione dicam, et ab usu Latini sermonis abstinuisse, ut quam paucissima 
essent a nobis profecta Aristarchi illius Obelis confodienda. Quicquid id est, tante 
hujus Libri editionem more tenuere, quante celebratam apud Gallos Comediam, 
cui Titulus Puella, de qua post diutarnam moram edita hoc Disticho lusit aliquis, 
qui ingenio inter eos id temporis emicuit : 


‘Illa Capellani dudum expectata Puella 
Jam post longa tamen Tempora venit Anus.’ 


Sed si nondum editur, certo certius appropinquat ut edatur Liber ille, quo Literatum 
orbem collustraturum, non tam jactat, quam minatur Autor Doctissimus; quoque 
errabundos Literatores ad rectas Latinitatis semitas revocaturum promittit, diligen- 
tissimus certe in Notationibus Verborum indagandis, utinam citra superstitionem. 
Quem tamen cum nondum videre licuit, orationem nostram quamvis incomptam 
non respues, castigatissimam futuram, cum Lime istius Dentes subierit. Vix alius 
occurrit, qui de se, suisque scriptis, et acumine, magis honorificé sentire videtur, 
quam Cl. Carrius, nisi Gronovius Filius, cujus Vocem arrogantem, et prefidentem 
pace tua adjungam. ‘ Absit,’ inquit, ‘ ut non alius sit fructus tot Laborum, qui ad 
Linguas illustrandas impensi sunt, nisi ut dici possit hance vel illam hujus vel illius 
Vocis videri esse significationem ; et non certo adfirmare possimus hance esse, non 
illam.’ Qui tamen Gronovius, ut apud Doctos constat, humani aliquid non semel 
passus est. 4 

‘Sed de Musis plus satis, quibus tantopere obstrepunt Belli et armorum fragores, 
ut ad Cantilenas eorum aures plane obsurduerint. Nec de Minerve amplius, sed 
Insularum Arcibus expugnandis solliciti sunt omnium animi, quibus nisi brevi potiti 
fuerimus, multum de Laudibus, et existimatione Eugenii decedet apud Imperitum 
Vulgus, licet ii, quibus acrius Judicinm, non-videre possint quid ex vitio vertendum 
sit, Letum tamen hujus obsidionis exitum speramus. Sin minus, concoquenda 
sunt hee et magis luctuosa etiam, si Deo ita visum fuerit. Id precipue optandum 
est, ut Desides jam a multis annis Germanos felix aliquis casus ad spes novas erigat, 
et ad bellum fortius capesssendum, ne totam Molem Belli, et virium Flandriam 
convertant Hostes. 

“Jucundissimus Palmerius literis suis me haud ita pridem compellavit, adeo 
doctis et elegantibus, ut tantum non preripuerit spem omnem imitandi, et Latine 
Scriptionis usu nobis interdixerit. Nos interim Studiorum suorum Adjutores 
advocat. Nescio autem quis oper mew usus sit in bone mentis palestraé tam 
feliciter desudantibus, nisi ut bene currentes voce insuper instigem. Egré tandem 
et invitus manum a Tabula retraho. Sed inique Charte Limites monent, ut 
desistam. Parentibus tuis optimis obsequia mea vice tua ut deferas, rogo, et 
properatis literis certiorem facias, eam me Locum, non quem merui, sed magnopere 
cupio in affectibus tuis tenere. Datse ex Adibus Blinbeggarianis rv. Iduum Octobris 
anno Salutis MDCCVIII°.” 


These letters are directed— 


“ Juveni prestantissimo 
Puitiero YorkIo, 
at Mr, Salkeld’s, 
Brook Street, 
; near Holborn Bars, London.” 
—Birch MS, Additional, 4235, p. 112. 


LORD HARDWICKE, 39 


intelligent person who might serve as a sort of law tutor for his sons, 
—to assist and direct them in their professional studies. The attorney 
eagerly recommended his clerk, Philip Yorke, who was immediately 
retained in that capacity, and, giving the highest satisfaction by his as- 
siduity and his obliging manners, gained the warm friendship of the 
sons, and the weighty, persevering, and unscrupulous patronage of the 
father. He now bade adieu to the smoky office in Brooke Street, Hol- 
born,* and he had a commodious chamber assigned him in the Chief 
Justice’s house in Lincoln’s Inn Fields. Released from the drudgery not 
only of going to Covent Garden market, but of attending captions and 
serving process, he devoted himself with fresh vigour to the abstruse 
parts of the law and to his more liberal studies. Farther, he took great 
pains to acquire the habit of correct composition in English,—generally 
so much neglected by English lawyers that many of the most eminent 
of them will be found, in their written ‘* opinions,” violating the rules 
of grammar, and without the least remorse constructing their sentences 
in a slovenly manner, for which a schoolboy would be whipped.t The 
“Tatler” had done much to inspire a literary taste into all ranks. This 
periodical had ceased, but being now succeeded by the ‘ Spectator,” 
Philip Yorke ‘‘ gave his days and nights to the papers of Addison.” 
Although he never approached the excellence of his model, he was 
so far pleased with his own proficiency that he aspired to the honour of 
writing a “Spectator.” Accordingly, with great pains, he composed 
the well-known Letter, signed “ Partie Homeprep,” and dropped it 
into the Lion’s mouth. To his inexpressible delight, on Monday, 
April 12, 1712, it came out as No, 364, with the motto added by 


Steele :— 
“ Navibus atque 
Quadrigis petimus bene vivere.”’ 





As a lawyer desirous of upholding our craft by all fair means, I 
should have been proud to have warmly praised this performance, but 
Iam sorry to acknowledge that I cannot honestly object to the terms 
in which it was ‘‘vilipended” by Dr. Johnson.{ I will, however, 
select one or two of the best passages, in the hope that the reader may 
form a more favourable judgment of it.—Having described a foolish 
mother, who is persuaded that “to chain her son down to the ordinary 
methods of education with others of his age, would be to cramp his 


* “Three years he sat his smoky room in, 


Pens, paper, ink, and pounce consumin’.” 


+ This undoubted fact shows strikingly the difference between speaking and 
writing ; for some of those who did not at all know the division of a discourse into 
sentences, or the grammatical construction of a sentence, have been listened to with 
great and just admiration when addressing a jury,—without their inaccuracies and 
inelegancies being discovered. Erskine could compose with accuracy and elegance, 
but this could be said of very few of his contemporaries. 

1“He would not allow that the paper (No. 364) on carrying a boy to travel, 
signed Philip Homebred, which was reported to be written by the Ld, Ch. Hard- 
wicke, had merit. He said, ‘it was quite vulgar, and had nothing in it luminous.’” 
—Boswell’s Life of Johnson, vol. vi., p. 152. 


40 LIFE OF 


faculties, and do an irreparable injury to his wonderful capacity,” Mr. 
Philip Homebred, trying to imitate the manner of Addison, thus pro- 
ceeds :—‘‘ I happened to visit at the house last week, and missing the 
young gentleman at the tea-table, where he seldom fails to officiate, 
could not, upon so extraordinary a circumstance, avoid inquiring after 
him. My Lady told me he was gone with his woman, in order to 
make some’ preparations for their equipage; for that she intended very 
speedily to carry him to travel. ‘The oddness of the expression shocked 
me a little; however¥I soon recovered myself enough to let her know 
that all I was willing to understand by it was, that she designed this 
summer to show her son his estate in a distant county, in which he had 
never yet been. But she soon took care to rob me of that agreeable 
mistake, and let me into the whole affair.” ....‘* When I came to 
reflect at night, as my custom is, upon the circumstances of the day, 
I could not but believe that this humour of carrying a boy to travel in 
his mother’s lap, and that upon pretence of learning men and things, is 
a case of an extraordinary nature, and carries on it a particular stamp 
of folly. I did not remember to have met with its parallel within the 
compass of my observation, though I could call to mind some not 
extremely unlike it. From hence my thoughts took occasion to ramble 
into the general notion of travelling, as it is now made a part of educa- 
tion. Nothing is more frequent than to take a lad from grammar and 
taw, and under the tuition of some poor scholar, who is willing to be 
banished for thirty pounds a year and a little victuals, send him crying 
and snivelling into foreign countries. Thus he spends his time as 
children do at puppet-shows, and with much the same advantage, in 
staring and gaping at an amazing variety of strange things; strange, 
indeed, to one who is not prepared to comprehend the reasons and 
meaning of them; whilst he should be laying the solid foundations of 
knowledge in his mind, and furnishing it with just rules to direct his 
future progress in life, under some skilful master of the art of instruc- 
tion,” —Here we have good sense and grammatical language, but does 
the writer give us “thoughts that breathe, and words that burn ?7”— 
has he succeeded in attaining “an English style, familiar but not 
coarse, and elegant but not ostentatious?” Had he taken to literature 
as a trade, he would have had poor encouragement from Lintot and 
Cave, and he would hardly have risen to the distinction of being one of 
the heroes of the Dunciad. I fear me it will be said that a great 
lawyer is made ez quovis ligno, and that he who would starve in Grub 
Street from his dulness,—if he takes to Westminster Hall, may become 
*‘ the most illustrious of Chancellors.” 

I have no means of knowing how this paper was received at the 
time.—It is said that our law-student wrote another, which was pub- 
lished in a subsequent volume, but which, probably, had less applause, 
for he did not distinctly own it, and his family could never. identify it. 
He wisely adhered to juridical studies, and laboured more and more 
assiduously to qualify himself for his profession, 

He now regularly attended the courts in term time, taking notes of 


LORD HARDWICKE., 41 


the arguments and judgments,—which in the evening he revised and 
digested. He likewise attended to oratory, and acquired that close and 
self-possessed manner of speaking before the public by which he was 
afterwards distinguished. I do not find anything expressly said about 
his politics in early life, but, from his father’s connexion with the Dis- 
senters, he was probably bred in the Low Church party. He, no 
doubt, was a zealous Whig when patronised by Lord Parker ; and I do 
not find any charge of inconsistency ever brought against him. 

The house of Brunswick was actually on the throne prior to his ap- 
pearance in public life. He was called cto the bar in Easter Term, 
1715, being then in his twenty-third year.* 

His progress was more rapid than that of any other débutant in the 
annals of our profession. He was immediately pushed by old Salkeld, 
who himself had many briefs to dispose of, and who had great influence 
among his brother attorneys. Several young men with whom he had 
formed an intimacy while in his clerkship, now being ‘upon the roll,” 
were perhaps of still greater use to him. 

He began his practice in the Court of King’s Bench, where he en- 
joyed the marked favour of Lord Chief Justice Parker, It soon 
happened that he had to argue a special case upon an important and 
intricate point of law. The judgment of the Court was with his client, 
and he received high compliments from the Chief Justice for the re- 
search, learning, and ability which he had displayed.t From that 
day forth he was much employed in the ‘“speciat argument line,” 
although it was some years before he acquired the reputation of a 
** leader,” 

By Mr. Salkeld’s advice, he chose the Western Circuit, where al- 
though he had no natural connexion,—by means which must have 
excited some jealousy and distrust, but which could not be proved to 
be incorrect, he was suddenly in good junior business at every assize 
town. About two years after his start, Mr. Justice Powis, a foolish old 
Judge, went the Western Circuit, and, surprised to see so young a man 
in every cause, was anxious to know how he had got on so rapidly. It 


* “ Parliament tent. 6° die Maij,1715.—M* Simpson T. proposed by M* Jauncy, 
M' York P. proposed by Mt Mulso, Mr’ fforster J. proposed by M' Harcourt, Mt 
Newton J. proposed by Mt Offley, M' Idle J. proposed by M' Avery, M* Brabant 
H. proposed by S* William Whitelock, and M* Sherwood J. proposed by M* Attor- 


ny Genall, for the Degree of the Utter Barr.” 

On the 20th of the same month Mr, Philip Yorke was admitted to a set of 
chambers. 

7 ie following is the only other entry relating to him in the Books of the Middle 
emple : 

“ Ad Parliament, tent. 10™° ffeb‘j, 1720™°.—It is ordered—That S* Philip Yorke, 
Knt, his Majt'® Soll' Generall, be called up to the Bench of this Society in order 
to his Reading.” 

+t We are not told how he received these compliments. He was probably pleased 
and grateful; but I once heard a young barrister, who entertained a very high, and 
perhaps somewhat excessive, opinion of his own merits, say, under similar circum, 
stances, “I think the Judges use a very great liberty in presuming to praise me for 
my argument.” 


42 : LIFE OF 


has been said since, that early success on the Circuit must arise from 
“‘ sessions, a book, or a miracle.” The practice of barristers practising 
at Quarter Sessions had not then begun, and miracles having ceased, Powis 
thought that young Yorke must have written some law book, which had 
brought him into notice. The bar dining with the Judges at the last 
place on the Circuit, and the party being small on account of so many 
having taken their departure for London, before the toast of ‘* Prosperity 
to the Western Circuit,” and ‘ Quinden. Pasch.” were given,* there 
was a pause in the coaversation, and Mr. Justice Powis, addressing the 
flourishing junior, who was sitting nearly opposite to him, said, ‘* Mr. 
Yorke, [ cannot well account for your having so much business, con- 
sidering how short a time you have been at the bar; I humbly conceive 
you must have published something ; for, look you, do you see, there is 
scarcely a cause before the Court, but you are employed in it, on one 
side or other. I should, therefore, be glad to know, Mr. Yorke, do you 
see, whether this is the case ?”— Yorke, ‘* Please ye, my Lord, I have 
some thoughts of publishing a book, but, as yet, I have made no pro- 
gress in it.” The Judge, smiling to think that his conjecture was not 
quite without foundation, became importunate to know the subject of 
the book, and Yorke, not being able to evade his inquiries, at last said, 
‘*T have had thoughts, my Lord, of doing Coke upon Littleton into 
verse; but I have gone a very little way into it.”— Powis. “ This is 
something new, and must be very entertaining; and I beg you will 
oblige us with a recital of a few of the verses.” Mr. Yorke long 
resisted, but finding that the Judge would not drop the subject, be- 
thought himself that he could not get rid of it better than by com- 
pounding a specimen of such a translation, something in the Judge’s 
own words, and introducing the phrases with which his Lordship was 
in the habit of interlarding his discourse upon all occasions, let the 
subject be grave or gay. ‘Therefore, accompanying what he intended 
to say with some excuses for not sooner complying with the Judge’s 
request, he recited the following verses, as the opening of his transla- 
tion :— 
“He that holdeth his lands in fee 
Need neither to quake nor to quiver, 


I humbly conceive; for look, do you see, 
They are his and his heirs for ever.”’t 


A knavish speech sleeps in a foolish ear. Although all others present 
perceived the jest, the learned Judge was not struck by the peculiarity 
of the diction, and was so much convinced that this was a serious at- 
tempt to impress upon the youthful mind the great truths of tenures, that 


* It would appear that the present custom then prevailed of the Judges, when the 
barristers dine with them, giving as a toast when the party is to break up, “ Pros- 
perity to the O, Circuit,” except that, at the last place on the Spring Circuit, they 
afterwards give “ Quinden. Pasch.” being the first return of Easter Term ; and on the 
Summer Circuit, “ Cras. Animarum,” being the first return in Michelmas Term; 
which is as much as to say, “ T’o our next merry meeting in Westminster Hall.” 

+ The first section of Littleton in prose says— Tenant in fee simple is he which 
hath lands or tenements to hold to him and his heirs for ever.” 


LORD HARDWICKE., 43 


meeting Mr. Yorke a few months afterwards in Westminster Hall, he 
inquired “ how he was getting on with the translation of Littleton ?’* 
The supposed translator was now so prosperous, that he thought he 
might not improperly contract a matrimonial alliance, and in the object 
of his choice he showed his usual prudence and good sense. This was 
a gay widow with a good jointure, the niece of Lord Somers, and the 
niece by marriage of Sir Joseph Jekyll, the Master of the Rolls, at 
whose house in Chancery Lane he became acquainted with her.t 
Yorke was a remarkably handsome young man, and his addresses were 
well received by the lady ; but she referred him to her father, Mr. 
Cocks, a Worcestershire Squire. Fortified bya letter of introduction from 
Sir Joseph, who encouraged the match, he repaired full of confidence to 
the residence of his intended father-in-law. The old gentleman re- 
ceived him politely, but learning the object of his visit, asked him for 
his rent roll, and Mr. Lygon, his daughter’s first husband, having had 
a very ample one, was surprised to hear that all Mr. Yorke’s estate 
consisted of ‘a perch of ground in Westminster Hall.” However, in 
answer to a letter to the Master of Rolls, asking how he could think of 
introducing into the family a young man incapable of making a settle- 
ment, his Honour so strongly represented the brilliant prospects of the 
rising lawyer, that the required consent was given, and the union took 
place,—which turned out most auspicious, for the married couple lived 
together to old age in uninterrupted affection and harmony, sharing the 
most wonderful worldly greatness, and seeing a numerous family of 


* Powis seems then to have been the butt of the profession, having had a leaden 
chain of lineal successors down to the present time. Duke Wharton celebrates him 
in the once-popular lines ; 

“ When honest Price shall trim and truckle under, 
And Powis sum a cause without a blunder ; 
When Page one uncorrupted finger shows, 

And Fortescue deserves another nose, 
Then shall I cease my charmer to adore, 
And think of love and politics no more.” 


Yet the simplicity of the Judge in believing in the metrical translation of Littleton 
is not so great as unlearned readers may suppose. My professional brethren have 
all read and tried to recollect * The Reports of Sir Edward Coke, Knt. in verse.” 
This volume was first printed in 1742, and a new edition of it was published so 
lately as 1825. It professes, in two lines, with the name, to give the point decided 
in every case which Coke has reported: e. g. 


“‘ Archer, if he for life infeoff in fee, 
It bars remainders in contingency.” 
“ Shelley, whose ancestors a freehold take, 
The words (his heirs) a limitation make.” 
“ Monopolies granted by King are void, 
They spoil the trade in which the youth’s employ’d.” 
When I was in a special pleader’s office, a brother pupil thus began to versify 
“'Tidd’s Practice :’— 
“ Actions are all, and this I'll stick to, 
Vel ex contractu vel delicto,” 


t+ Her maiden name was Cocks, she being the daughter of Charles Cocks, Esq., 
by a sister of Lord Somers. 


44 LIFE OF 


sons and daughters grown up—all well behaved and prosperous, and as 
fully ixed among the high aristocracy as if they had descended from 
companions of the Conqueror. Mr. and Mrs. Philip Yorke began their 
married life in a very small house near Lincoln’s Inn, the ground floor 
of which served him for an office, and saved him the expense of cham- 
bers in the Temple, then considered by him a very great object. 

In the year 1718, upon the resignation of Lord Cowper, Chief Justice 

: Parker, shortly after created Earl of Macclesfield, 
[May 12, 1718.] recvived the Great Seal, and Mr. Yorke transferred 
himself to the Court of Chancery, still continuing to go the Western 
Circuit.* Equity business soon flowed in upon him—partly from his 
own merit, and partly from the favour of his patron, testified in a man- 
ner which gave mortal offence to the seniors at the bar. Serjeant 
Pengelly, in particular, was so disgusted at frequently hearing the 
Chancellor observe—‘‘ what Mr. Yorke said has not been answered,’ 
that he one day threw up his brief, saying in a loud voice, “I will no 
more attend a Court where I find Mr. Yorke is not to be answered.” 
Some have gone so far as to ascribe Lord Macclesfield’s subsequent ruin 
to this favouritism, asserting that ‘‘ Serjeant Pengelly’s resentment, 
joined with that of others in the same situation, brought upon the Chan- 
cellor that-investigation of his private management, and the abuses 
committed or connived at by him in his appointment of the officers of 
his Court, which terminated in his impeachment and conviction.” 

However, there can be no doubt that the discontent of the old 
Chancery pleaders arose very much from the superior talent of the 
young common lawyer, whose invasion was so formidable to their em- 
pire. Most of them had been contented to pick up a knowledge of 
Chancery practice from experience, referring pro re natd to what was 
to be found on the subject in the Reports and Abridgments ; but he 
entered upon a systematic course of study, qualifying him to be a’great 
advocate or a great judge in the Court of Chancery—tracing the equi- 
table jurisdiction of the Court to its sources, and thoroughly under- 
standing all the changes it had undergone. 

In the case of Rez v. Hare and Mann,t in which Sir Robert Wal- 
pole’s family was interested, he had an opportunity, of which he fully 
availed himself, of showing that he was deeply skilled in the history 
and practice of this tribunal, and he raised his reputation as high among 
the Solicitors here as it had been among the Attorneys in the King’s 
Bench. In his celebrated letter to Lord Kames, on the distinction be- 
tween Law and Equity, written many years after, he speaks with much 
complacency of his arguments on this occasion, and insinuates that it 
contributed greatly to his elevation. ‘It was,” says he, “ when I was 


* For more than half a century afterwards the Chancellor’s sittings were so ar- 
ranged as to allow the counsel practising in his Court to go the Circuit, and Equity 
men had the advantage of keeping up their common law learning. 

_ + Cooksey, 72. Serjeant Pengelly was certainly the most bitter manager of the 
apy sinent 
1 Strange, 146, Feb, 1719, 5 Geo, 2. 


-LORD HARDWICKE, 45 


a very young advocate, before I was Solicitor-General, but it is cor- 
rectly reported ; for I remember Sir John Strange borrowed my papers 
to transcribe, so that the faults in it are all my own. In arguing that 
cause, which turned upon a critical exception to the return of a writ of 
scire facias in Chancery, I found, or at least fancied it to be necessary 
to show, that all the various powers of that Court were derived from, or 
had relation to the Great Seal, and I endeavoured to prove that the 
equitable jurisdiction exercised by the Chancellor took its rise from his 
being the proper officer to whom all applications were made for writs 
to ground actions at common law, and from many cases being brought 
before him, in which that law would not afford a remedy, and thereby 
being induced through necessity or compassion to extend a discretionary 
one.’’* 

Lord Macclesfield now determined on the first vacancy to make a 
resolute effort to have his protégé appointed a law officer of the Crown, 
notwithstanding the shock such a promotion might give to aged 
Serjeants who had been in vain expecting advancement ever since the 
coming in of King William ; and with this view he prevailed upon the 
Duke of Newcastle, who had immense borough interest, to return him 
to the House of Commons for Lewes. 

Parliament met on the 11th of November after Yorke was elected, 
and with the exception of the Christmas recess, continued sitting till he 
went on the Spring Circuit in the beginning of March ; [Nov. 1719 
but I cannot find that he opened his mouth in this inter- ; ‘J 
val, and it is probable that he prudently remained silent; for the only 
measure of public interest then debated in the House of Commons was 
Sunderland’s Peerage Bill, on which the Whigs were divided, and it might 
have appeared presumptuous for a young lawyer to give any opinion.} 

Before he had made his maiden speech in Parliament,—the folly as 
well as the favour of others working for his advantage,—an oppor- 
tunity most unexpectedly arose for promoting him in his profession. 
The Attorney and Solicitor-General, though not free from personal dis- 


* This very learned argument arose out of a seemingly very trifling objection to 
a writ of scire facias, which required the defendant “to appear in Cancellaria nostra 
in Octobris, &c., ubicunque tune fuerit.” Objection, that it ought to have been 
“ ubicunque eadem Cancellaria tune foret in Anglia,” on the ground that since the 
Union with Scotland there was only one Great Seal for Great Britain; that the 
Chancery might be held in Scotland; that for matters arising in England suitors 
could not lawfully be summoned to Scotland; and therefore that this return, 
which might call the defendant into Scotland, was bad.— Yorke, for the defendant, 
gave a learned history of the jurisdiction ofthe Court of Chancery, contending that 
it arose entirely fiom the Great Seal; and as the Great Seal was the Great Seal of 
Great Britain, the Chancery had become the Chancery of Great Britain, But Lord 
Macclesfield said, that “although the Act of Union had made the Great Seal the 
Great Seal of Great Britain, it had not made the Chancery so, The powers of the 
Chancery as a Court are over private property ; and the articles of Union preserving 
to each country its municipal jurisdictions, the English Court of Chancery could not 
be held in Scotland, although the Great Seal might be carried to Scotland, and for 
some purposes used there.”—1 Str. 158. 

+ A list of the majority and of the minority was published, but his name does not 
appear in either.—7 Parl. Hist. 624, 


46 REIGN OF GEORGE I, 


likes and jealousies, have almost always preserved ostensibly a mutual 
good understanding, and have cordially co-operated in the public ser- 
vice. But Mr. Lechmere and Sir William Thompson, the then 
Attorney and Solicitor-General, hated each other so intensely that they 
had several very indecent quarrels in private causes at the bar, and in 
the transaction of official business. ‘Their enmity was whetted by a 
sordid competition,—‘* which of them should be mast resorted to in 
granting charters of incorporation to Joint Stock Companies?” Now 
was raging the fever af speculation throughout the nation, of which the 
‘‘ South Sea Bubble” was a symptom, and companies were formed, 
which, both for object and means, equalled in extravagance anything 
witnessed in our own times. They brought a great harvest to the law 
officers of the crown, but of this, Lechmere, being more popular, and 
supposed to have more influence, carried off by far the largest share. 
Thompson at last, openly in the House of Commons, preferred a 
charge against him of corruptly taking excessive fees, and recom- 
mending improper grants, The charge was indignantly denied by 
Lechmere, who said that ‘“ he had the honour to be a Privy Councillor, 
Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, Attorney-General, a Member of 
that House, and more than all, a gentleman ; that such an accusation 
could not therefore but fall upon him more heavily ; that he defied all 
the world—the worst and bitterest of his enemies—to prove him guilty 
of corrupt or unwarrantable practices, and that he demanded an im- 
mediate inquiry.” ‘Thompson undertook to make good the accusation, 
and a committee sat to hear the evidence. It appeared that the 
Attorney-General’s clerk had been rather eager to make joint stock 
companies “pay handsomely,” but there did not rest even a passing 
shadow of suspicion on his master; whereupon it was unanimously 
resolved, ‘ that the informations of Sir. William Thompson. were mali- 
cious, scandalous, and false, and that the Right Honourable Nicholas 
Lechmere had discharged his trust in the matters referred to him with 
honour and integrity.” Thompson was immediately dismissed from 
his office of Solicitor-General.* Lechmere tried to procure the ap- 
pointment for an attached friend of his own, that he might no more be 
exposed to such squabbles; but the Lord Chancellor claimed the ap- 
pointment as his patronage,—and he was at this time all powerful, both 
with the King and the minister. 

Philip Yorke had joined the Western Circuit during this contro- 
[a. p. 1720.] versy, little thinking that he had any personal interest in 

‘iad ‘J it, but while he was attending the assizes at Dorchester, 
he received the two following letters. The first was from the Lord 
Chancellor, and was directed to « Philip Yorke, Esq., pple ok at 
Law, M.P., at the Assizes at Dorchester.” 


*¢ Sir, 
« The King having declared it to be his pleasure that you be bis 
Solicitor- General in the room of Sir Wm. Thompson, who is already 


* However, he was afterwards made Recorder of London and a Baron of the 
Exchequer. 


LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE, AT 


removed from the office, I with great pleasure obey his Majesty’s com- 
mands, to require you to hasten to town immediately upon receipt 
hereof, in order to take that office upon you. I heartily congratulate 
you upon this first instance of his Majesty’s favour, and am with great 
sincerity, 
“ Sir, 
‘¢ Your faithful and obedient servant, 
‘ PaRKER, C,” 


The second was from Mr, Secretary Craggs. 


“¢ Dear Sir, 

“¢ You will be informed from other hands of what has happened be- 
tween the Attorney and Solicitor-General. In the squabble the latter 
has lost his employment, and the first, I believe, will not succeed in his 
recommendation of Mr. Denton to be his successor, for I believe the 
King has resolved to appoint you, which I am glad of, for his service, 
and for my particular satisfaction : who am entirely, 

‘“ Your most faithful servant, 


meta “J, Craces. 
“Cockpit, March 17, 1719 [1720].” 


Mr. Yorke, on reading these letters, after receiving the hearty con- 
gratulations of his brother circuiteers, who rejoiced sincerely in the 
elevation of such a formidable competitor, returned his briefs and set 
off post for London. On the 22d of March he was sworn in Solicitor- 
General before Lord Macclesfield, and a few days after, on being pre- 
sented by him to the King, he received the honour of knighthood. 

With the exception of the members of the Western Circuit, the pro- 
fession considered Sir Philip’s appointment a very arbitrary act. He 
was only twenty-nine years of age, and had been little more than four 
years at the bar. He had displayed great talents, but Wearg and ‘Tal- 
bot, who were considerably his seniors, and had always deserved well 
of the Whig party, were men of distinguished reputation, and qualified 
to do credit to any office in the law, however exalted. Others of infe- 
rior merit were disappointed, and the blame being all laid on the Lord 
Chancellor, the resentment which he had before excited by his partiality 
for the tutor of his sons was greatly exasperated. 

It is said that even the attorneys and solicitors looked askance at 
the new law officer, though disposed to be proud of the elevation of a 
gentleman so closely connected with them. Very much run afier as a 
junior, he as yet had not got into any leading business, and they were 
alarmed by seeing him with so little experience suddenly put over the 
heads of the gentlemen with silk gowns, whom they had been accus- 
tomed to employ. When Easter Term came round, and he took his 
place within the bar in the Court of Chancery, he was left out of most 
of the new causes which came on to be heard, and some of his discon- 
tented rivals were sanguine enough to hope that his premature eleva- 


48 REIGN OF GEORGE I, 


tion had ruined him for ever. But by the exertions of his personal 
friends among the solicitors, by being supposed to have “ the ear of 
the Court,” by his own great talents, by his indefatigable industry, by 
the gentleness of his manners, and by the insinuating complacency of 
his address, he rapidly overcame these prejudices, and was retained in 
every suit.* 

His acceptance of office having under the recent statute vacated his 
seat in the House of Commons, he was re-elected for Lewes without 
opposition. He afterwards sat for Seaford, being always returned 
without trouble or expense,—which was considered by some of his con- 
temporaries as an instance of his luck, and by others as a proof of his 
management, in having so effectually insinuated himself into the good 
graces first, of Lord Macclesfield, and then of the Duke of Newcastle. 
But for some years to come his name is never mentioned in printed 
parliamentary debates, and we are left in great doubt as to the part he 
acted in the House of Commons. 

It happened in little more than a year, that Lechmere retiring from the 
[May, 1720.] bar with a peerage, there was a vacancy in the office of 

; ‘4 Attorney-General, and some supposed that the Chancellor 
would recklessly thrust his juvenile favourite into it, although only thirty 
years of age ; but prudence prevailed, and it was filled up with the experi- 
enced Sir Robert Raymond, afterwards Lord Chief Justice of the King’s 
Bench. 

Sir Philip Yorke continuing Solicitor-General, first gained great 
public applause on the trial of Christopher Layer for high treason in 
conspiring to bring in the Pretender. The prisoner, after being ably 
defended by counsel, himself spoke so clearly and ingeniously in his 
own defence, as to make a considerable impression on the jury, and to 
endanger the conviction—then considered of the last consequence, not 
only to the safety of the ministry, but-of the family on the throne. 

The Solicitor-General rose to reply when it was late at night, and 
delivered a speech between two and three hours long, which, during 
the whole of that time, riveted the attention of all who heard it, and 
was most rapturously praised as a fine specimen of juridical eloquence. 
Certainly it is what is technically termed a ‘hanging speech”—very 
quiet and dispassionate; seemingly candid, and even kind to the 
accused ; but in the most subtle manner bringing forward all the salient 
points of the evidence against him—and, by insinuation and allusion, 
taking advantage of the prepossessions of the jury. He thus con- 
cluded: “It has been said, indeed, that he is but an inconsiderable 
man—of no rank or fortune fit to sustain such an undertaking. That 
observation may be true ; but since it is plain that he did engage in it, 
this with other things clearly proves that he was set on work and sup- 
ported by persons of more influence. And, gentlemen, this is the most 
affecting consideration of all. But I would not even in this cause, so 
important to the King and to the State, say anything to excite your 
passions : I choose rather to appeal to your judgments; and to these I 


* One account of his début as Solicitor-General says, “The storm which was 
raised by his premature promotion fell wholly on his patron.”—Cooksey, 73. 


LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE., 49 


submit the strength and consequence of the evidence you have heard. 
My Lord, I ask pardon for having taken up so much of your time. I 
have only farther to beg, for the sake of the King, for the sake of the 
prisoner at the bar, and for the sake of myself, that if through mistake 
or inadvertency I have omitted or misrepresented anything, or laid a 
greater weight on any part of the evidence than it will properly bear, 
your Lordship willbe pleased to take notice of it, so that the whole 
case may come before the Jury in its just and true light.” The con- 
viction was certainly according.to law, and if Layer’s head had been 
immediately placed on Temple Bar, his execution, though lamentable, 
might have been thought a necessary severity—but all concerned in 
the prosecution and the punishment in@urred and deserved obloquy— 
by the delay interposed with a view to elicit from the prisoner the accu- 
sation of others—and by his execution long after the verdict, when he 
had disappointed the hope of further disclosures.* 


CHAPTER CXXX. 


CONTINUATION OF THE LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE TILL HE WAS 
APPOINTED LORD CHANCELLOR. 


On the 31st of January, 1723, Sir Robert Raymond being promoted 

to be Chief Justice of the King’s Bench, Sir Philip Yorke, 
i SS [A. p. 1723] 

with general applause, succeeded him as Attorney-Ge- 
neral, This situation he held above thirteen years, exhibiting a model 
of perfection to future law-officers of the crown. He was punctual and 
conscientious in the discharge of his public duty, never neglecting it that 
he might undertake private causes, although fees were supposed to be 
particularly sweet to him, and having felt the ills of penury, he was 
from the commencement to the close of his professional career eager to 
accumulate wealth. Considering this propensity, he had likewise great 
merit in resisting the temptation to which others have yielded of ac- 
cepting briefs in private causes, when he could not be present at the 
hearing of them, or could not do fair justice to the client who hoped to 
have the benefit of his assistance. I may likewise mention, that al- 
though he was afterwards supposed to have become stiff and formal in 
his manners,—while he remained at the bar he was affable and unas- 
suming, courteous to his brethren of longer standing, making himself 
popular with the juniors, and trying to soften the envy excited by his 
elevation. In Parliament he never displayed any impatience to gain dis- 
tinction, but he was regular in his attendance, and he was always ready 
to render fair assistance to the government, and to give his opinion on 
any legal or constitutional question for the guidance of the House, 


* 16 St. Tr. 319. 
VOL. V. 4 


50 ’ REIGN OF GEORGE I. 

Without being a “ prerogative lawyer,” he stood up for the just powers 
of the Crown, and without being a ‘ patriot,” he was a steady defender 
of the rights and privileges of the people. 

As public prosecutor in Revenue cases in the Exchequer, he is uni- 
versally lauded. ‘Though advocate for the Crown, he spoke,” says 
one contemporary, ‘ with the veracity of a witness, and the impartiality 
of a judge.” When defending Walpole’s Excise scheme against the 
misrepresentations of its opponents, he not ungracefully appealed to his 
own practice in prosétuting those who attempted to defraud the revenue 
and to injure the fair dealer; pronouncing a eulogy upon himself to 
which, we are told, ‘‘ the whole House assented with universal applause.” 

He was not so fortunate in his prosecutions for libel. In his time 
sprang up the controversy respecting rights of juries, which was not 
settled till the close of the eighteenth century. He contended for the doc- 
trine, that the jury were only to decide upon the sufficiency of the evi- 
dence of publication, and upon innuendoes ; 7, é., whether particular words 
or abbreviations in the alleged libel had the meaning imputed to them by 
the indictment or information, as, whether “ the K—g” meant “ our So- 
vereign Lord the King ;” but that the lawfulness or criminality of the 
writing prosecuted was pure matter of law for the opinion of the Court, 
The Judges coincided with him in their directions, but juries were some- 
times rebellious. The obnoxious journal of that day was the ‘ Crafts- 
man,” conducted by Bolingbroke, Pulteney, and the principal leaders 
of the opposition to Sir Robert Walpole. Sir Philip Yorke succeeded 
in obtaining a conviction in the case of the famous Hague letter, written 
by Bolingbroke ;* but he was foiled in his prosecution of a subsequent 
violent attack upon the Government, supposed to be from the pen of 
Chesterfield, for though the Chief Justice laid down the same law, and 
there could be no doubt about publication or innuendoes, the jury, 
very much approving of the sentiments of the supposed libel, and think- 
ing them not only innocent but laudable, found a general verdict of mot 
guilty. It was then that Pulteney composed his famous ballad, with the 


oft-quoted stanza,— 
“For Sir Philip well knows, 
That his innuendoes 
Will serve him no longer 
In verse or in prose: 
For twelve honest men have decided the cause, 
Who are judges alike of the facts and the laws.’’t 


But, considering how the law of libel had been laid down by Lord 


* 17St. Tr. €25: and see a very amusing account of this trial by Lord Mansfield, 
21 St. Tr. 1037. “There was a great concourse of people; it was a matter of great 
expectation, and many persons of high rank were present to countenance the de- 
fendant.”’ 

+ The two last lines were misrepresented in the Dean of St. Asaph’s case by Lord 
Mansfield; who, to suit his purpose, or from lapse of memory, said Pulteney had 
admitted that “libel or no libel ?”” was a question only for the Court, by saying in 
his ballad— 

“For twelve honest men have decided the cause, 
Who are judges of fact, though not judges of laws.” 


—21 St. Tr. 1037. 


LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE. 51 


Holt and other Judges deemed constitutional, I believe that Sir Philip is 
to be deemed forbearing in instituting prosecutions against the press, 
and mild in conducting them.* 

While Attorney-General, he was not entirely absorbed in the routine 
of official and professional business. He contrived to have leisure, not 
only to attend to the literature of the day, but when occasion required, 
to investigate thoroughly, by a reference to rare books and ancient re- 
cords, questions respecting our judicial history. In consequence of some 
clashing of jurisdiction between Lord King as Chancellor, aad Sir 
Joseph Jekyll as Master of the Rolls, he wrote and published “ A Dis- 
course of the Judicial Authority belonging to the Office of Master of 
the Rolls,’’ which is full of recondite learning, and on which the decla- 
ratory act was passed, placing the jurisdiction of ‘* His Honour” on its 
present footing. 

His first appearance as Attorney-General in the House 1723 
of Commons, was in conducting the bill of pains and pe- LA: D. ‘| 
nalties against Bishop Atterbury, by which that learned and factious pre- 
late was banished for life, and it was made high treason to correspond with 
him. There was no difficulty in producing a moral persuasion of the 
existence of the plot to bring in the Pretender on which it was founded, 
but no ingenuity could justify the departure from the rules of evidence 
established for the safety of the subject, or an attempt to punish, by a mi- 
nisterial majority, where there must have been an acquittal before the re- 
gular tribunals of the country. The Attorney-General had to carry 
through similar bills against Plunket and Kelly, implicated in the con- 
spiracy. In support of the last, he is said to have been particularly en- 
ergetic, but no fragment of his speech is preserved. 

In thé year 1725, Sir Philip was placed in a very disagreeable predi- 
cament by the impeachment of his patron—originating, as some thought, 
in the Chancellor’s violent predilection for Sir Philip himself. He has 


* Lord Chesterfield thus speaks of him as a law officer of the Crown: “Though 
he was Solicitor and Attorney-General, he was by no means what is called a pre. 
rogative lawyer. He loved the constitution, and maintained the just prerogative 
of the Crown; but without stretching it to the oppression of the people. He was 
naturally humane, moderate, and decent; and when by his employments he was 
obliged to prosecute state criminals, he discharged that duty in a very different 
manner from most of his predecessors, who were too justly called the bloodhounds of 
the Crown.” 

t 3 Geo. 2, c. 30; 3 Bl. Com. 450. 

t See 3 Parl. Hist. 54—293; 16 St. Tr. 323—693. Swift tried to revenge his 
friend Atterbury by ridiculing this plot in “Gulliver’s Travels,” published soon 
afler: “ Another professor showed me a large paper of instructions for discovering 
plots and conspiracies against the government. He advised great statesmen to ex- 
amine into the diet of all suspected persons, ‘their time of eating, upon which side: 
they lay, with what hand,’ &c.;”’ and then he describes a certain method “ by an. 
examination of the ejecta, of ascertaining whether the design of the traitor be to. 
murder the King, or only to raise an insurrection, or to burn the metropolis.”— 
Voyage to Laputa, ch. vi. Kelly having been confined thirteen years in the Tower, 
was allowed to make his escape. Atterbury, it is well known, died in exile; and 
when his body came over for interment, the coffin was opened at the Custom House,, 
“lest it should be made the medium of a treasonable correspondence, contrary. to the: 
act of Parliament.” 


52 REIGN OF GEORGE I. 


been accused of heartlessness and ingratitude on this occasion, and of 
standing a silent and unconcerned spectator of the distress of the man 
to whom he owed all his advancement in life.* But I think the charge 
is unjust, or greatly exaggerated. If, by resigning his office, he could 
have become the strenuous defender of his patron, with the remotest 
chance of saving him, it would have been his duty to have made the at- 
tempt. But the current ran so strong against the denounced « trafficker 
in judicial offices and robber of widows and orphans,” that to stem it 
was impossible,—and”useless self-immolation could not be demanded 
from any one. ‘The Commons were almost unanimous for the impeach- 
ment, although some thought there ought to have been a previous in- 
quiry by a committee. When there appeared an opening for embar- 
rassing the proceeding by a motion to recommit the articles of impeach- 
ment, Sir Philip Yorke strenuously, though ineffectually, supported it 
against Serjeant Pengelly, and Sir Clement Wearg, the Solicitor- 
General. 

On the appointment of managers to conduct the prosecution at the 
bar of the House of Lords, the Attorney-General ought to have been 
of the number, but he begged to be excused.on account of the private 
friendship subsisting between him and the late Lord Chancellor ; and 
we are told that he had great “ difficulty in obtaining his request.” + 
[t is not easy to specify any other step he could have taken to show 
his sympathy. Yet I confess, | should have been gratified to have 
heard that he tried to turn the tide of public opinion, by a pamphlet 
‘*¢ On the Sale of the Office of Master in Chancery, proving that it has 
been at all times transferred for a valuable consideration,” or that he 
had made one gallant speech in his place in the House of Commons, 
for the man who had such claims to public applause, and who had 
drawn down ill will upon himself by befriending the friendless. Surely 
Sir Robert Walpole, who was not without generosity of sentiment as 
well as good nature (although he was anxious to rescue his govern- 
ment from the imputation of screening high delinquency), would not 
have discarded his Attorney-General for one solitary indiscretion, At 
all events, it would have much consoled me to have known that Sir 
Philip visited Lord Macclesfield in the Tower, was in the habit of cheer- 
ing his retreat at Derby, and showed a grateful solicitude to vindicate 
his memory. But I am afraid that he left the condemned Chancellor 
to his fate, like ** others whom his former bounty fed,”—eager only for 
his own aggrandizement. 

I must now pursue the prosperous career of the wary Sir Philip. 
Having, upon the introduction of Lord Macclesfield, made the acquaint- 
ance and gained the good graces of the Duke of Newcastle, on the 
fall of his first patron, he devoted himself to that ‘ place-loving noble- 
man,” who, hardly gifted with common understanding, and not pos- 
sessing the knowledge of geography and history now acquired at a 
parish school,—from the rotten borough system then in prime vigour, 


* Cooksey, 73. +8 St. Tr. 414—480. 


LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE. 53 


was in high office as a minister longer than Burleigh, and had much 
more power and patronage than that paragon of statesmen. Among 
other advantages which Yorke derived from this connexion, he was 
always returned to Parliament free of expense, while Willes, and other 
competitors at the bar were involved in contests which made a serious 
inroad upon their professional gains, and kept them poor, while he was 
advancing to be a “ millionaire.” Lord Hardwicke’s detractors allow 
that he never forgot these obligations. ‘The best thing that can be 
remembered of the Chancellor,” says Horace Walpole, “ is his fidelity 
to his patron ; for, let the Duke of Newcastle betray whom he would, 
the Chancellor always stuck to him in his perfidy, and was only not 
false to the falsest of mankind.” 

On the vacancy occasioned by Lord Macclesfield’s conviction, 
although he had pretensions to the Great Seal, he was much better 
pleased to remain Attorney-General—with the bar as a certain re- 
source—than to accept a precarious office, the loss of which was likely 
soon to leave him without employmentor profit—considering that George 
I. was old and infirm, and that an entire change of ministry was anti- 
cipated at the accession of the Prince, When that event did take 
place, he was delighted to find himself, by the skilful management of 
Walpole, more secure than ever—in the enviable situation of Attorney- 
General to a powerful government, with the certainty of succeeding to 
the highest offices in the law.* 

In the session of 1730, he was called into action by the combination 
between the Tories and discontented Whigs, which began to annoy, 
without being formidable to, the minister. With the view of crippling 
the Austrians, with whom there were some differences pending, and 
who wished to negotiate a considerable loan in London, the Attorney- 
General brought in an Act to forbid the lending ef money to any 
foreign power without the King’s license, and to compel all persons to 


* His high position at this time may be estimated by the following letter of intro- 
duction, addressed to him from Tickell, the friend of Addison. 


“ Tho’. Tickell, Esq. to St Philip Yorke, Attorney-General, 


“ Dublin Castle, Nov. 4, 1725. 
Sirs 
“Mr. Broughton, whom my Lord Lieutenant has sent over with the Irish 
Money Bill and some private ones, has so often heard me boast of being known to 
you, that he has desired me to introduce him to you, bya Letter. He indeed thinks 
too highly of my interest in you, in imagining, that my recommendation may in- 
cline you to give him the utmost despatch in his business. But I will take upon 
me to say, that his conversation is so agreeable, that for your own sake you will 
endeavour to put a speedy end to the serious part of it, and fall into that, for which 
you have so nice a taste. I should not presume to take this liberty, if I did not 
honour you more for your humanity, than others can for your great talents; and if 
upon that account I was not with the truest respect, 
“Your most humble and most 
“ Obedient Servant, 
“ THo, TICKELL. 
“ To the honble. St Philip York, 
“his Majesty’s Attorney-General.” 


Bibl. Birch. Add. MS, 4325, p. 125. 


54 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


answer a bill in Equity to discover if they were concerned in such 
transactions. This measure being strongly opposed by Pulteney, and 
by Sir Wm. Wyndham, Sir Philip Yorke ably urged all that could be 
said in its defence. He tried to support it on the principles of the 
common law, according to which the King has the prerogative to pre- 
vent his subjects from entering into the service of a foreign Prince by 
the writ of me exeat regno, or by proclamation to recall them,—urging 
that “ their money, the sinews of war, might be more useful and dan- 
gerous than their pérsons. The Dutch might have the advantage of 
being the lenders of the money if we were not, but the measure was 
not to be judged by mere commercial considerations of profit and loss, 
but was framed with a view to a question of peace and war, and to the 
balance of power in Europe: it was only a temporary restraint, and 
might be compared to an embargo, which interfered with trade more 
directly, yet when necessary for the public safety was not complained 
of. As to the clause compelling a discovery, it was indispensable, as 
without it, from the facility of secretly entering into such transactions, 
the Act would be wholly nugatory,”* It passed by a large majority ; 
and Coxe says, ‘a sufficient justification of the measure was, that the 
want of money compelled the Court of Vienna to submit to terms of 
accommodation ;”f but the Dutch practice of selling ammunition to 
their enemies is probably more in accordance with true statesmanship 
as well as the principles of political economy. 

The next time that Sir Philip Yorke’s name is mentioned as taking 
a part in the debates, is in the session of 1732, when, upon a great 
muster of opposition under the auspices of Bolingbroke, the minister 
was so hard run for speakers as to be obliged to put up the Attorney- 
General to defend the augmentation of the army. Thus called upon, 
he was not quite.so ded/icose as he is said to have been on a subsequent 
occasion, when Walpole is represented to have hailed him as «. military 
officer ; but he contended that, with a view to peace, the proposed force 
was necessary. ‘It is certainly,” said he, “the interest of this 
nation to render itself as considerable as possible amongst our neigh- 
bours, for the greater opinion they have of our strength and power, 
the less apt they will be to undertake any expeditions or invasions 
against us, and the more easy it will be for us to obtain from them 
any advantages or immunities which we may think necessary for 
improving the trade and increasing the riches of the kingdom. The 
factions and divisions which are springing up at home, encourage 
our enemies abroad, and render a commanding attitude on the part 
of the government more indispensable, His Majesty only asks that 
which is required for the public safety, and any apparent disagreement 
between him and his Parliament will be the signal for internal commo- 
tion and foreign war, ie: After the most furious debate which had 
been known since the reign of Queen Anne, the Minister had a majo- 
rity of 241 to 171. 


* 8 Parl. Hist.187, + Coxe’s Walpole, vol. ii. p. 358. ¢ 8 Parl. Hist. 893. 


LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE. 55 


In the following year was brought forward the yy 
** Excise epee as Sir Philip Yorke is said to WBABGE dad Coste) 
have delivered one of the best speeches in favour of that measure ; but 
in print it is extremely vapid. The most valuable part of it probably 
was where he showed, from his professional knowledge and experience 
as Attorney-General, that the laws of Ezctse, under which it was pro- 
posed to put the collection of the duties on wine and tobacco, were not 
more severe than the laws of the Customs, from which they were to be 
transferred. He denied that the measure encroached on the constitu- 
tion, “ unless frauds in the collection of the revenue by long usage had 
become a part of the constitution,” and he maintained that “ the only 
liberty which would be subverted was the liberty of smuggling.” 

A violent opponent of the measure had during the debate asserted 
that its object was to revive the worst practices of Empson and Dud- 
ley. So grossly ignorant of English history was the Prime Minister, 
that he had been obliged to ask Sir Philip Yorke, sitting by him on the 
Treasury bench, “who Empson and Dudley were ;” and he was 
afraid to trust himself (lest he should commit some ludicrous blunder) 
to repel the charge. Sir Philip now took occasion to reprobate the con- 
duct of the wicked tools of Henry VII., and drew a comparison between 
his own past conduct and that of his predecessor Mr. Attorney-General 
Dudley, which drew forth cheers from all parts of the House.—We 
ought not to doubt that the speech deserved the high praise bestowed 
upon it, the report of it which we have being prepared by some one 
who probably (according to the usage of the time) had heard nota 
word of it, and who, at all events, was evidently ignorant of the princi- 
ple and details of the bill.* Sir Philip had ample time to prepare, and 
he had strong motives to put forth all his strength; for now was the 
first occasion of his experiencing the danger of being turned out of 
office by a hostile majority. 

He never again spoke in the House of Commons, Here he had now 
sat fifteen years, being heard respectfully on the rare occasions when 
he took part in the debate, but never having acquired much reputation 
as an orator. In addition to the prejudice then prevailing against him 
by reason of his profession, he was too didactic and logical for the 
understandings of the country gentlemen, and he did not sufficiently 
deal in personalities, and in clap-trap declamations, to suit himself to 
the somewhat mobbish taste of that assembly. 

His elevation to the woolsack had been for some time anticipated 
from the age and growing infirmities of Lord King, whose imme- 
diate successor he was generally regarded. The secret history of the 
arrangements actually made on the resignation of Lord King, and the 
death of Lord Raymond, is not authentically known, and it would be 
vain to speculate farther upon them.t 

The profession and the public were highly satisfied with the new 
Chancellor and the new Chief Justice. Talbot was 

z . [Nov. 1733.] 
considered of a more open and generous nature than his 


* 8 Parl. Hist. 1287. + Ante, vol. iv. chap. exxvil. 


56 REIGN OF GEORGE II. 


colleague; and all who knew him were pleased that he had recovered 
the precedence of which he had been unjustly deprived by Lord Mac- 
clesfield’s partiality for another ; while the learning, ability, and strict 
integrity which the world admitted in Sir Philip Yorke, though he was 
less remarkable for his amiable qualities, gave assurance that the 
duties of the important office of Lord Chief Justice of the King’s Bench 
would be discharged in the most exemplary manner. Although he 
might not, himself, be perfectly contented with the allotment to him of 
the lower dignity, this was no slight which he would have been justified 
in resenting ; and, acquiescing with a good grace, he professed his de- 
termination to support the Government, and to back the new Lord Chan- 
cellor in the House of Lords to the utmost of his power, At the same 
time that he was made Chief Justice of England he was elevated to the 
peerage, by the title of Baron Hardwicke, of Hardwicke, in the 
county of Gloucester; and he was likewise sworn a member of the 
Privy Council. It has been said that he was likewise then admitted into 
the cabinet; but this is certainly a mistake, although, on particular 
subjects, he was confidentially consulted, from time to time, by Wal- 
pole.* 

He took his seat in the Court of King’s Bench in Michaelmas Term, 
1733, and continued to preside in that Court above three years. No 
case of very great importance, either civil or criminal, came before him 
as a common-law Judge, but we know, as well by the general testimony 
of contemporaries as by the printed Reports of his decisions,t that he 
uniformly displayed, in addition to the strictest impartiality, much 
acuteness of intellect and great depth of legal erudition. Following 
such men as Holt, Parker, and Raymond, he found the principles of the 
old common law well defined, and they were still tolerably sufficient 
for the exigencies of society. He assisted a little in adapting them to the 
new commercial transactions and changed manners which were gradually 
springing up; but to his successor, Lord Mansfield, was reserved the 
glory of relieving the poverty of our feudal jurisprudence from the 
spoils of foreign codes. Although Lord Chief Justice Hardwicke 
showed high capacity while he presided in a common-law court, and 
did ample justice to the suitors, he did not make his name very dis- 
tinguished by any considerable improvements in the system which he 
there administered. He subsequently exhibited greater powers when 
he had to expatiate in a new field. 

The business of the Court of King’s Bench now chiefly rested on his 
shoulders. Lee, his senior puisne, who afterwards succeeded him, was 
of some service from his knowledge of pleading ; but Probyn, who came 
next, was a mere cipher ; and Page, the junior, required to be kept in 
strict subjection, for he was ignorant, foolish, and presumptuous. In 
cases of importance, with a view to check the babbling of the puisnes,— 
after the arguments were finished, the Chief Justice insisted always that 
time should be taken to consider, and he afterwards delivered the 


* See Biogr. Brit. “ Hardwicke.” + See “ Reports Temp. Hardwicke,” by Lee. 


LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE. ‘BT 


decision in a written judgment, which he himself prepared. Thus he 
closed their mouths, unless they ventured to differ in opinion, which 
rarely happened.—So much for Lord Hardwicke, as a common-law 
Judge.* 

During his Chief Justiceship his political importance was greatly 
enhanced. Many had expected that he would succeed better as a de- 
bater in the Upper than he had done in the Lower House of Parliament, 
and this expectation was not disappointed. He now seemed to feél 
more at home, and, with increased confidence, his speaking rapidly im- 
proved. Notso graceful as Chesterfield, he was more argumentative and 
forcible; and after he had had a little experience in his new sphere, it 
may be truly said that between the attainder of Bolingbroke and the 
appearance there of Lord Mansfield and Lord Chatham, the House of 
Peers presented no one who could attack or defend with more skill or 
success, 

His first encounter was with Lord Chesterfield, who, smarting from 
his dismissal on account of his opposition to the Excise Scheme, made 
a furious attack upon the Government, when an address of thanks was 
moved in answer to a message from the King, proposing an augmenta- 
tion of the forces, in order to be prepared for a threatened war.  In- 
dulging in the common-places about the danger to liberty from military 
violence, the “* Wit among Lords,” maintained that as a standing army 
in time of peace was contrary to law, it could only be legalized by 
an act of Parliament, so that the proposed address would be nugatory. 
Lord Hardwicke immediately followed, and thus began : ‘‘ As thenoble 
Earl who has just sat down has based his objections to the motion so 
much on legal and constitutional grounds, perhaps, my Lords, | may 
be excused in now offering myself to your Lordships’ notice, although 
I must confess that the marshalling of troops, and the sufficiency of 
military establishments, are not subjects with which I have ever been 
familiar. While the King by his prerogative may enlist soldiers when 
he pleases, | agree that a standing army cannot be maintained in time 
of peace without the authority of Parliament, because of his own au- 
thority he could not punish them by martial law, nor could he raise 
funds for their support. But we have passed the ‘ Mutiny Bill,’ and 
we shall pass the ‘ Appropriation Bill,’ by which the army may be 
disciplined and paid,—and, with great submission to the noble Earl, no 
farther legislation will be necessary to gain the object recommended by 
the message from his Majesty. Under such checks, the maintenance 


* Horace Walpole says, that while Chief Justice, “ he had gained the reputation 
of humanity by some solemn speeches made on the circuit at the condemnation of 
wretches of low crimes; but I know not to what the sarcasm refers, and I suspect 
that it is introduced to give point to the charge of inhumanity on the trial of the 
rebel Lords.—Lord Thurlow is represented as having thought Lord Hardwicke a 
better common-law, than equity, Judge: “I have heard the late Lord Thurlow say, 
that he thought the Earl of Hardwicke was more able, as Chief Justice of the 
King’s Bench, than he was as Lord Chancellor ; but I could never discover on what 
ground.”—Nich. Reeoll. ii. 119. This must have been with a view of lowering 
Lord Hardwicke in the latter capacity, rather than exalting him in the former. 


58 REIGN OF GEORGE IL 


of a sufficient force to preserve internal tranquillity, and to command 
the respect of foreign nations, while it is indispensable for the protection 
of our persons and our property, can raise no danger to liberty. Being 
summoned here to advise his Majesty de arduis regni, he now consults 
you whether the existing force is sufficient? Ifyou are of opinion that 
it ought to be: augmented, you will say so by the address which has 
been moved, According to the usage of Parliament, the Crown and the 
two Houses communicate by message and address; from the usage of 
Parliament we knowsthe law and the constitution,—and there is no pre- 
tence for the ingenious suggestion of the noble Earl, that on such an 
occasion you are to proceed by an act of Parliament.”—He then went 
into the general merits of the question, and from the state of Europe 
and our foreign relations showed the prudence as well as the legality 
of the proposed measure.* 

In the session of 1735, Lord Hardwicke is not mentioned as taking 
part in any debate except upon the bill respecting the withdrawing of 
troops from parliamentary elections,—when he tried to calm the fears 
that were entertained of the military overawing the electors, and the 
little necessity there was to provide new punishments for such offences.T 

The following year he rendered essential service to the public by 
supporting a bill to amend the mortmain acts,—which, instead of being 
repealed (as some now wish), will I hope be extended to bequests 
of personal property,—for it is essentially necessary in all cases to 
guard death-bed from improper solicitations, by which superstition 
may be encouraged, and those for whom dying persons ought to pro- 
vide may be left destitute.{ He next opposed and threw out a well- 
meant but impracticable bill for regulating the payment of tithes by 
Quakers, which seems to have excited very great interest at the time, 
but which, from the general commutation of tithes, is now unim- 
portant.§ : 

The last speech he made while Chief Justice, was in a debate which took 

[Fes. 1, 1737.] place a few days before the death of Lord Talbot, on 
the murder of Captain Porteous at Edinburgh, and the 

riots which had lately occurred in different parts of England. He now took 
occasion to refer to the explosion of gunpowder, and the dispersion 
of libels which had happened the preceding term in Westminster Hall. 
Between one and two in the afternoon, while all the courts were 
sitting,|| a loud report was heard, and the Hall was filled with smoke. 
This was found to be an ingenious device for dispersing a mass of 
libels on the government. Some of these being carried into the 
Court of King’s Bench, and shown to the Chief Justice, he imme- 
diately made a comment upon their wickedness, ordered them to be 
laid before the grand jury, who were then sitting, and prevailed upon 


* 9 Parl. Hist. 538. + Ibid. 886—910., 

t Ibid. 1119. § Ibid. 1218. 

|| Hours had now greatly altered; and the courts, instead of meeting at seven and 
breaking up at eleven, met at nine and sat till two. For many years after, how- 
ever, there were post-prandian sittings. 


LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE. 59 


the Queen, acting as Regent, to offer a large reward for the discovery 
of the offender. The author of this ‘‘ Gunpowder Plot” turned out to 
be a crack-brained, nonjuring parson, who had acted without any 
associates,—so that the aflair was laughed at,—and it had been treated 
with some ridicule by the opposition peers. The indignant Chief thus 
expressed himself :—‘* The attempt which noble Lords opposite make 
, the subject of their jests, was certainly one of the most audacious 

affronts ever offered to an established government, and was levelled 
directly at the illustrious family now upon the throne. I do not mean, 
my Lords, the powder or rockets then blown up, for I do not believe 
that the guilty contriver meant to destroy the Hall, or to injure any one 
in it; but I mean the scandalous and seditious libels spread about the 
Hall by’the explosion, and afterwards dispersed over the whole of this 
vast metropolis. These libels not only reflected most indecently on 
the proceedings of the two Houses of Parliament, but denied his 
Majesty’s right to the crown, and asserted the Pretender to be our 
true and only lawful sovereign. If vigorous steps had not been 
taken to detect and punish the offender, the world would have be- 
lieved that the established government was so feeble that it might be 
insulted with impunity, and this insult would soon have been fol- 
lowed up by an organized insurrection, and by foreign invasion.” 
Having commented upon the death of Captain Porteous, which he de- 
nounced as “‘ an atrocious murder, the authors of which must be brought 
to condign punishment,” he described the formidable nature of the riots 
in different parts of England, and justified the suppression of them by 
the military. He strongly combated the notion that there was any- 
thing illegal in employing soldiers to preserve the public peace. ‘I 
am surprised, my Lords,” said he, ‘to hear it said that if the King’s 
troops should now and then, upon extraordinary occasions, be called 
to the assistance of the civil magistrate, we should on that account be 
supposed to live under a military government. I hope it will be allowed 
that our soldiers are our fellow-citizens. They do not cease to be so 
by putting on a red coat, and carrying a musket. Now, it is well 
known that magistrates have a power to call any subject of the King 
to their assistance, to preserve the peace, and to execute the process of 
the law. The subject who neglects such a call is liable to be indicted, 
and, being convicted, to be fined and imprisoned for his offence. Why, 
then, may not the civil magistrate call soldiers to his assistance, as well 
as other men? While the King’s troops act under the directions of the 
magistrate, we are as much under civil government as if there were not 
a soldier in the island of Great Britain. The calling in of these armed 
citizens often saves the effusion of innocent blood, and preserves: the 
dominion of the law.”’* 

On this day Lord ‘Talbot, who took an active share 
in the Pai was in excellent health, and seemed [Fes. 1, 1797.) 
likely for many years to fill the office of Chancellor, establishing a 


* 9 Parl. Hist. 1294, 


60 - REIGN OF GEORGE II. 


reputation as the greatest Equity Judge of the century in which he 
flourished.* If these expectations had been realized, Lord Hardwicke 
would have attracted little comparative notice, and having gained no 
conspicuous place in history, would only have been recollected by 
lawyers, like Lord Raymond, as an eminent common-law judge. But 
he was destined to be twenty yearsa cabinet minister,—himself to form 
cabinets,—and, generations after his death, to have a statue erected to 
his memory by the English nation as the greatest contributor to our 
Equity code. Fe 
On the day Lord Talbot died the Great Seal was delivered by his 
[Fen. 14, 1737.] pepe ashe! the hands of George II. at St. Asay 
palace. ‘There never was any doubt as to his suc- 
cessor, for Lord Hardwicke was now regarded as decidedly the most 
useful man to be introduced into the Cabinet and to preside on the 
woolsack as Chancellor,—and he himself, placing just confidence in 
the stability of the administration, did not hesitate to agree to a move 
which promised to gratify his love of fame, his love of power, and his 
love of money. But, there being some difficulty with respect to salary 
and pension, and other accompanying arrangements requiring conside- 
ration, the Great Seal remained for a whole week in the personal cus- 
tody of the King.t 
Meanwhile, as Parliament was sitting, and there was no Lord Chan- 
cellor or Lord Keeper, it was necessary to provide a Speaker for the 
House of Lords, and the Great Seal, while in the King’s possession, 
was (somewhat irregularly) put to a commission authorizing Lord 
Hardwicke to act in that capacity.t He accordingly did act for several 
days as Speaker without being Chancellor. During this interval, it 


* It appears from the Lords’ Journals, that down to the 9th of Feb. 1737, Lord 
Talbot was present in the House, and presided as Chancellor. 

t This is the last instance of such an occurrence. Since then no Chancellor has 
died in office ; and the usual course has been, that the Great Seal has been surren- 
dered up by the outgoing Chancellor at a Council, and, at the same Council, has 
been delivered to his successor. 

t This, on principle, seems as objectionable as the act of Charles II., in sealing 
Lord Danby’s pardon with his own hand. See ante, vol. iii. 

§ “Feb. 10.—The Lord Chancellor being absent, the Lords were informed by the 
Duke of Newcastle that his Majesty had been pleased to grant a commission under 
the Great Seal to Philip Lord Hardwicke, Lord Chief Justice of the Court of King’s 
Bench, to supply the room and place of Lord Chancellor in this House.” The com- 
mission being read, was found to authorize him “ from time to time to use ahd sup- 
ply the room and place of Lord Chancellor of Great Britain in the Upper House of 
Parliament, amongst the Lords spiritual and temporal there assembled, during the 
absence of our right trusty and well-beloved counsellor Charles Lord Talbot, &c., 
from his accustomed plaee in our said Upper House of Parliament, and then and 
there to do and execute all such things which our said Chancellor of Great Britain, 
hate LS supplying the said room and place, should or might do in that be- 

alf,” &c. 

“Feb, 11.—The Lord Hardwicke sat Speaker by virtue of his Majesty’s com. 
mission,’ On the 11th the house was adjourned to the 16th. 

“Feb. 16.—The Lord President signified to the House that the Lord Chancellor 
being dead, his Majesty had been pleased to grant another comission under the 

Great Seal to the Lord Hardwicke to supply the room and place of the Lord Chan. 


LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE., 61 


is related that Walpole, resisting some of Hardwicke’s demands, said 
to him by way. of threat,—“I must offer the Seals to Fazakerly.” 
‘ Fazakerly |”? exclaimed Hardwicke, “ impossible! he is certainly a 
Tory !—perhaps a Jacobite!” * “ It’s all very true,” coolly replied Sir 
Robert, taking out his watch, “ but if by one o’clock you do not accept 
my offer, Fazakerly by two becomes Lord Keeper, and one of the 
stanchest Whigs in all England.” The bargain was immediately 
closed, and Lord Hardwicke was contented with the promise that the 
next Tellership should be bestowed upon his son. 

Sir John Willes, the Attorney-General, being provided for by being 
made Chief Justice of the Common Pleas, and it being settled that Lee 
should be Chief Justice of the King’s Bench, and that Sir Dudley Ryder 
and Sir John Strange should be the new Attorney and Solicitor-Gene- 
ral,—on the 21st of February the Great Seal was delivered to Lord 
Harpwickkg, with the title of Lord Chancellor. However, he con- 
tinued Chief Justice of the King’s Bench till the commencement of 
Easter Term, and on the first day of that Term, after a grand proces- 
sion to Westminster Hall, attended by Sir Robert Walpole and many 
of the nobility, having been sworn in and transacted business in the 
Court of Chancery, he went into the Court of King’s Bench, and there 
delivered a judgment in a case which had been previously argued,—so 
that he had the glory of presiding on the same day in the highest civil 
and the highest criminal Court in the Kingdom.* 





CHAPTER CXXXI. 


CONTINUATION OF THE LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE TILL THE DEATH 
OF QUEEN CAROLINE, 


I am sorry to be obliged to begin my account of Lord Hardwicke, as 


cellor or Lord Keeper of the Great Seal in this House during his Majesty’s plea- 
sure.” This is the irregularly sealed commission. On the 21st Feb., Lord Hard- 
wicke sat as Lord Chancellor. 

* “ Geo, II., 14th Feb, 1736-7. Memorandum—that on Monday, the 14th day 
of February, 1736-7, Charles Lord Talbot, Lord High Chancellor of Great Britain, 
departed this life ; and, on the evening of the same day, the Great Seal was delivered 
by the Duke of Newcastle to his Majesty, who kept it in his custody till Monday, 
the 2lst of the same month of February, during which time there was nothing 
sealed but a commission appointing Philip Lord Hardwicke Speaker of the House 
of Lords during pleasure ; and, on the said 21st of February, his Majesty was gra- 
ciously pleased to deliver the Great Seal to the aforesaid Philip Lord Hardwicke, 
with the title of Lord Chancellor, who was sworn at the same time in Council, and 
took his place accordingly ; and his Lordship sat in Lincoln’s Inn Hall during the 
Seals after Hilary Term, but he was not sworn in Westminster Hall. till the 27th 
day of April, 1737, being the first day of the then next Easter Term, when his 
Lordship took the oaths of allegiance and supremacy, and the oath of office, the 
Master of the Rolls holding the book, and the deputy clerk of the Crown giving the 
oaths. After which, the Attorney-General moved that the oath might be recorded, 


bnt his Lordship did not take the oath of abjuration till another day, in the King’s 
Bench.”—Roll, 1727—1760. : 


62 REIGN OF GEORGE II. 


: Chancellor, by reprobating that conduct which his 
Laren 2751737,] i diaeicnictath ei tsi have justified, and which 
some moderate men have attempted to palliate. 

I have related how Lord’ Chancellor Talbot, from his admiration of 
the genius of ‘Thomson the poet, and from personal kindness for him, 
had rescued him from the penury and dependence, then the fate of men 
of letters, by appointing him “ Secretary to the Briefs.” This was an 
office in the Court of Chancery which, in strictness, was held only 
under the Chancellow making the appointment, but the holder of which 
was generally continued in it by the succeeding Chancellor. Of all the 
cases ever known, Thomson’s is the one where it might have been ex- 
pected that the usage of confirmation would have been most eagerly ad- 
hered to.* The author of the Seasons was not only a man of genius, 
and most amiable in his private character, but he was warmly attached 
to the Whig party, and had essentially promoted its interests by his 
writings. He had received the office, on which he was entirely depen- 
dent, from the colleague and personal friend of the present Chancellor, 
as a reward for his public services, as well as for his attachment to 
young Talbot, with whom he had travelled, and to whose memory he 
had offered a touching tribute of applause. 

I give the most mitigated account I can find of the affair—in the 
words of Dr. Johnson,—who disliked Thomson, as a Scotsman, as a 
Whig, and as the author of “ Liperty,” and was willing to cast blame 
in this affair upon him, rather than upon the Chancellor. After stating 
the poet’s appointment to his office by Lord Talbot, he thus proceeds :— 
‘** Thomson now lived in ease and plenty, and seems for a while to have 
suspended his poetry ; but he was soon called back to labour by the death 
of the Chancellor, for his place then became vacant; and though Lord 
Hardwicke delayed for some time to give it away, Thomson’s bashful- 
ness or pride, or some other motive, perhaps not more laudable, withheld 
him from soliciting ; and the new Chancellor would not give him what 
he would not ask. He now relapsed to his former indigence ; but the 
Prince of Wales was at that time struggling for popularity, and by the 
influence of Mr, Lyttleton professed himself the patron of wit; to him 
Thomson was introduced, and being gaily interrogated about the state 
of his affairs, said, ‘ that they were in a more poetical posture than for- 
merly,’ and had a pension allowed him of one hundred pounds a 
year.”’> 

One cannot without indignation think of a man in Lord Hardwicke’s 
situation seeking to subject Thomson to the humiliation of asking a 
favour, when it might naturally have been expected that his continuance 
in the office of secretary would have been spontaneously and earnestly 


* There are several such offices held under the Attorney-General. When I was 
first appointed to that office in 1834, I had the usual applications to be continued in 
them, which of course were granted. When I was re-appointed in 1835, I inti- 
mated that such applications were unnecessary ; and my successors, Sir Frederick 
Pollock, Sir William Follett, and Sir F rederick Thessiger, have behaved in the same 
spirit. 

t Dr. Johnson’s Life of Thomson. 


LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE. 63 


pressed upon him. Even Mr. Salkeld’s “ gratis clerk” had shown some 
degree of pride, and disliked carrying home cabbages from Covent Gar- 
den, and oysters from the fishmonger’s! An attempt has been made to 
praise Lord Hardwicke as a patron of literary merit, because he afier- 
wards obtained a pension from the public purse for Mallet, as a reward 
for his pamphlet against Admiral Byng ; but says a contemporary, “ let 
it be recollected that the same man, on his succeeding Talbot as Lord 
Chancellor, deprived Thomson, a poet and patriot of the first class, of 
the place of Secretary of Briefs, which had been given him by his pre- 
decessor, and was the*poor poet’s only subsistence and support.”*  Al- 
though Lord Hardwicke always took care not only to have the law on 
his side, and was generally solicitous to have something plausible to say 
in his own defence, should his conduct be questioned,—it must be con- 
fessed that he was not only rather selfish, but that, from heartlessness, 
he even lost opportunities of doing acts which would have been consi- 
dered generous, and which would have given him popularity—without 
depriving him of money, or of any family aggrandizement, 

We are now to see him in his glory as an Equity Judge. Although 
he by no means distinguished himself in framing laws to be enacted by 
Parliament—viewed as a magistrate sitting on his tribunal to administer 
justice, I believe that bis fame has not been exceeded by that of any man 
in ancient or modern times; and the long series of enlightened rules 
laid down by him, having, from their wisdom, been recognised as bind- 
ing on all who have succeeded him, he may be considered a great legis- 
lator. His decisions have been, and ever will continue to be, appealed 
to as fixing the limits, and establishing the principles of that great juri- 
dical system called Equrry, which now, not only in this country and in 
our colonies, but over the whole extent of the United States of America, 
regulates property and personal rights more than the ancient Common 
Law. 

The student, animated by a generous ambition, will be eager to know 
whence this great excellence arose 1—Like everything else that is valua- 
ble—it was the result of earnest and persevering labour. A complete 
knowledge of the common law was the foundation on which he built. 
This he had gained not only by reading but by circuit experience, by 
continuing frequently to plead causes in the King’s Bench and Exche- 
quer while he was Attorney-General, and by presiding above three 
years ina common-law court. Having been initiated in Chancery prac- 
tice during his clerkship with Mr. Salkeld, he had read attentively every- 
thing to be found in the books connected with equity, and he had ac- 
tually been a regular practitioner in Chancery during the whole of the 
Chancellorships of Lord Macclesfield and Lord King. He now revived 
his recollection of that learning by again going over the whole of it as 
if it had been new to him; and he obtained MS. notes of such of Lord 
Talbot’s decisions as were of any importance,—so that in all branches 
of professional information he was equal, and in many superior, to the 


* Cooksey, 36. 


64 REIGN OF GEORGE II. 


most eminent counsel who were to plead before him. But that to which 

I mainly ascribe the brilliancy of the career-on -which he was entering, 

was the familiar knowledge he acquired of the Roman civil law. The 

taste for this study he is said to have contracted from the necessity of 
preparing himself first to argue as an advocate, and then to decide as a 

judge, appeals to the House of Lords from the Court of Session in Scot- 

land. In that country he found the Roman civil law regulating the en- 

joyment and succession of personal property, and even frequently al- 

luded to by way of allustration in questions respecting entails. Like 

most English lawyers, in preparing for the bar, he had hardly paid the 

slightest attention to it. While Attorney-General he was retained in 

many Scotch appeals, and for the occasion he was obliged to dip into 

the Pandects and into the commentaries upon them; but although he 

had the discernment to discover the merit of these admirable compila- 

tions, it was not indispensably necessary for the discharge of his duty 

that he should examine them systematically, and his time was filled up 

with more urgent occupations. Now that he was to sit in the House of 
Lords as sole Judge to decide all appeals from Scotland, he saw the ne-. 
cessity of making himself a profound Scotch lawyer, and he found that 

this was impossible without being a good civilian, Therefore, having 

gone through Mackenzie, Bankton, and Stair,* he regularly proceeded to 

the Corpus Juris Civilis with Vinnius, Voet, and other commentators, and 

his mind was thoroughly imbued with the truly egzetable maxims of this 

noble jurisprudence. I delight in recording how his unrivalled eminence 

as an Equity Judge was achieved,—lest the aspiring but careless stu- 

dent should think it could be reached by natural genius and occasional 

exertion :— 





“ Pater ipse colendi 
Haud facilem esse viam voluit.... 
. +. curis acuens mortalia corda.”’ 


Lord Hardwicke, having bestowed unremitting pains in qualifying 
himself for the discharge of his high duties, —when occupying the judg- 
ment-seat exhibited a pattern of all judicial excellence. Spotless purity 
—not only an abstinence from bribery and corruption,t but freedom 
from undue influence, and an earnest desire to do justice,—may at that 


* He took special delight in “ Dirleton’s Doubts,” saying, “ his doubts are more 
valuable than other people’s certainties.” 

t One attempt was made to bribe Lord Hardwicke. Thomas Martin, mayor of 
Yarmouth, being threatened with a bill in Chancery, wrote a letter to the Lord 
Chancellor bespeaking his favour, and inclosing a bank note for 20i., of which his 
acceptance was requested “ for his trouble in reading the papers.” An order being 
made upon his worship, to show cause why he should not be committed to the Fleet 
for his contempt, he swore “ that the said letter was wrote, and the said bank note 
inclosed therein by him through ignorance, and not from any ill intent whatsoever.” 
Upon his paying all expenses, and consenting that the 201. should be distributed 
among the poor prisoners in the Fleet, the order was discharged —27th April, 1748. 
Sanders’s Orders, ii. 628.—Lord Sidmouth prosecuted in the King’s Bench for an 
offer to bribe him, a simpleton, who, when the criminal information came down, 
joyfully showed it to his family and his friends, believing that it was the patent for 
the office he wished to purchase. 


‘ 


LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE. 65 


time, and ever afterwards, be considered as belonging to all English 
Judges. But I must specially mention of this Chancellor, that he was 
not only a patient but an eager listener, conscious that he could best 
learn the facts of the case from those who had been studying it, and 
that, notwithstanding his own great stores of professional learning, he 
might be instructed by a junior counsel, who for days and nights had 
been ransacking all that could be found scattered in the books on a 
particular topic, actuated hy a desire to serve his client, and to 
enhance his own reputation, While the hearing was going on, the 
cause had the Chancellor’s undivided and devoted attention. Not only 
was he undistracted by the frivolous engagements of common life, but 
during a political crisis, when there were to be important changes in 
the cabinet, when his own continuance in office was in peril, he was, 
as usual, calm and collected; and he seemed to think of nothing but 
whether the injunction should be continued or dissolved, and whether 
the bill should be dismissed with, or without costs? Some said that 
he was at times acting a part, and that he was considering how he 
should conduct a political intrigue, or how he should answer an oppo- 
nent in debate,—when he pretended to be listening to a thrice-told tale ; 
but so much is certain, that no argument ever escaped him, and that, 
in taking notes, it was observed that ‘his pen always moved at the 
right time.”* He used to declare, that “he did not take his place 
upon the bench to write letters to his correspondents, or to read the 
newspaper.” + His voluminous note books are still extant, containing, 
at great length, the material proceedings of the Court during each day, 
—the statement of the case, the evidence, and the arguments of counsel, 
—with the answers to be given to them enclosed within brackets. 
When he took time to consider, he generally wrote his judgments either 
in his note books or on separate papers, to which his note-books refer. 
Unlike some Judges, deservedly of high reputation, whose impression 
on hearing a case stated was never known to vary, he appears not un- 
frequently, upon further argument and maturer consideration, finally to 
have arrived at an opinion quite different from that which he had at 
first entertained, and even expressed ; and he certainly well merited the 
character he gave of himself in this respect, when he said, ‘* These are 
the reasons which incline me toalter my opinion, and [ am not ashamed 
of doing it, for I always thought it a much greater reproach to a Judge 
to continue in his error than to retract it.”{ He never interrupted, to 


* i, e, I presume, when anything was said worthy of being noted. 

+ I must say, that this last practice has occasionally been carried to an indeco. 
rous and inconvenient length. A glance at a newspaper may be permitted toa 
Judge during a tedious reply, as a hint to the counsel against prolixity ; and such 
was the habit of Lord Mansfield, who was ever completely master of all the facts, 
and all the law, of every case that came before him. But I have seen a Judge in. 
dulge his curiosity by turning over the unwieldy pages of the “ Times,” while a 
counsel has been opening, in a condensed manner, a very important and compli- 
cated case—requiring the closest attention of a Judge, however quick, learned, and. 
discriminating. 

$2 Atk. 438. 

VoL. V. 5 


66 REIGN OF GEORGE II. 


show his quickness, by guessing at facts, or anticipating authorities 
which he expected to be cited. Not ignorant that the Chancellor can 
always convulse the bar with ‘¢ counterfeited glee,” he abstained from 
ill-timed jocularity, and he did not level sarcasms at those who, he 
knew, could not retort upon him. He had a complete control over his 
temper, and, from the uniform urbanity and decorurn of his own de- 
meanour, he repressed the petulance and angry passions of those who 
practised before him, insomuch that it was remarked, that not only was 
he never himself ledsainto any unbecoming altercation, but that he taught 
the rival leaders to behave to each other with candour and courtesy. 
It is likewise stated, to his credit, that, although in society he was sup- 
posed rather to be supercilious, presuming too much upon his acquired 
dignity, he was in Court uniformly affable to the solicitors, remember- 
ing that they were the class to which he expected himself to have be- 
longed, and to whose kindness he had been greatly indebted for his 
advancement. 

The arguments being finished, if the case seemed clear, and did not 
involve any new question, he immediately disposed of it ; but wherever 
his decision was likely to be quoted as regulating ‘‘ the doctrine of the 
Court,” he took time for consideration, and having perused his note 
and referred to the authorities cited, he came with a prepared and often 
a written judgment. On such occasions he was likened to ‘ the per- 
sonification of wisdom distributing justice and delivering instruction.” 

These performances certainly do come up to every idea we can form 
of judicial excellence. They are entirely free from any parade of 
learning, or the affectation of pointed or antithetical sentences. Two 
objects seem entirely to absorb the attention of the Judge: 1. Properly 
to adjust the disputed rights of the parties. 2. To establish a rule by 
which similar questions may be solved in future. He was anxious. to 
bring every case within the scope of some general principle which he 
enunciated and defined, guarding it with its proper conditions and ex- 
ceptions. He did not decide every-case upon its ‘‘ specialties” or pecu- 
liar circumstances,—leaving the profession entirely at a loss with 
respect to the general principle which had been discussed,—nor did he 
wrest the peculiar circumstances of the case to make it conform to his 
canon. Having lucidly stated the allegations on each side, and accu- 
rately enumerated the facts which were established, he propounded the 
question or questions which they raised, and on which his decree must 
depend. Then recollecting the observation of Lord Bacon, that ‘ his 
equity was to be taken from his books, and not from his brains,’ and 
that “ the Chancery was ordained to supply the law, not to subvert the 
law,” he reviewed all the authorities upon the subject, and if none of 
them were expressly in point, he tried to educe from them by analogy 
a rule which harmonised with them in principle, and which might equi- 
tably govern all cases similarly circumstanced. He never resorted, 
however, to forced interpretations or fanciful analogies, and he was 
always anxious to support his opinion by legal precedents—in the 
selection and application of which he was particularly happy. Nor was 


LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE, 67 


he betrayed into the seductive and dangerous practice of laying down 
rules in loose and sweeping terms, which might carry their authority 
far beyond the point necessary to be decided, and mischievously include 
cases which were not then in contemplation. He, therefore, expressed 
himself in the most guarded terms, and mentioned distinctly the qualifi- 
cations with which he meant hig opinion to be received. There was no 
enthusiasm in his nature, but he really had a passion (such as | have 
seen exhibited by the cool-headed Tenterden) to do justice, and to ad- 

vance the science over which he presided—most unlike the reckless- 
ness of some Judges in times gone by, only anxious to escape open 
censure—indifferent as to the rights of parties, the improvement of 
jurisprudence, and their own permanent fame. 

Lord Hardwicke’s judgments are deservedly praised for luminous 
method in the arrangement of the topics, and elegant perspicuity of 
language in the discussion of them. But I will venture to point out what 
Il consider their peculiar excellence—the fair and manly manner in 
which the arguments are stated which are to be overruled. J have 
known Judges who, in important cases, have entirely omitted to notice 
the most powerful objections to their view of the case—not probably 
from any disingenuous motive, but from not understanding them. Lord 
Hardwicke always fully sees and appreciates the arguments against the 
side which he adopts—restates them with additional force and clear- 
ness, and refutes them so satisfactorily as almost to bring conviction to 
the minds of those who had invented them, and had for a time been the 
dupes of their own subtlety. 

He was particularly praised for the manner in which he dealt with 
cases coming before him on exceptions to the Masters’ Report, and on 
appeal from the Master of the Rolls. He showed no propensity what- 
ever to reverse what had been decided, but he freely and boldly con- 
sidered every question submitted to him as the superior Judge. Not 
shrinking from trouble or responsibility, he formed his own opinion 
upon it, and resolutely corrected what appeared to him to be amiss. 
There were four Masters of the Rolls successively under him, and he 
will be found to treat them all with great-respect, but with great freedom. 

By these means Lord Hardwicke, in a few years, raised a reputation 
which no one presiding in the Court of Chancery has ever enjoyed, 
and which was not exceeded by that of the great Lord Mansfield as a 
common-law Judge. The wisdom of his decrees was the theme of 
universal eulogy. ‘* Etiam quos contra statuit, equos et placidos dimi- 
sit.” Such confidence was there in his administration of justice, that 
the business of the Court was greatly increased, and it is said that 
more bills were filed under him than at any subsequent time, although 
the property administered by the Court of Chancery has since been 
‘increased sevenfold. There were still rare complaints of delays in 
Chancery, from the intricate nature of the inquiries, the death of 
parties, and other inevitable obstructions to the final winding up of a 


68 REIGN OF GEORGE If 


suit, but by great exertions arrears were kept down, ‘and this is fondly 
looked back upon as the golden age of Equity.”* 

I hardly think it worth while to mention the statement which is so 
much harped upon by the common herd of Lord Hardwicke’s petty 
biographers, that only three of his decrees were appealed against, and 
that in each of these cases the decree was affirmed. ‘The truth is, that 
during the whole of his time, through management which I shall after- 
wards have to consider, he was the sole law Lord, and substantially the 
Chancery was a Cof@frt of the last resort. 

But I should do injustice to his memory if I were not to praise what 
hitherto has attracted little notice—the admirable manner in which he 
disposed of the judicial business in the House of Lerds. His demeanour 
on the woolsack appears to have been a model for all Chancellors. 
While he was affable and courteous, he studied to preserve order. He 
himself attended to the debates,t and his example and influence gene- 
rated a habit of attention and decorum among others. Though, in 
strictness, without more authority than any other Peer, all sides re- 
cognised him as moderator,and by his quiet and discreet exertions, 
unseemly altercations and excessive familiarity were. effectually dis- 
couraged, In his time a meeting of the Peers had somewhat the air of 
a deliberative assembly,— instead of being a lounging-place to hear the 
news of the day before dressing for dinner. : 

Although there were only three appeals from Philip to Philip, in all 
of which the decrees were affirmed without difficulty, there were a 
good many writs of error from the common law Courts, which, with 
the assistance of the Judges, he disposed of in a very masterly man- 
ner; and there were a great many appeals from Scotland, which, 
without assistance, he decided to the universal satisfaction of that 
country, where he was much honoured, till he abolished hereditary 
jurisdictions, and compelled the inhabitants to wear breeches, 

Iam now desirous of laying before the reader specimens of Lord 
Hardwicke’s performances as a civil Judge; and there are ample 
materials for doing so, for besides his own note books and his judgments 
in his own handwriting, there are several MS. collections of his de- 
cisions, by very able hands, during the whole time he sat in Chancery,{ 
and the principal cases before him have been digested and published 
by Atkyns, Vesey, Sen., and other reporters.§ Although these 


* Lord Hardwicke,—abstaining from drinking his bottle after dinner,—a sacri- 
fice too great for his successor,—regularly, in addition to his morning sittings, sat 
twice a week in the afternoon or evening. 

+ There are extant copious notes taken by him of debates which, with those of 
Archbishop Secker, have filled up lacune in the Parliamentary History. 

t Of one of these, by the great kindness of my friend, Mr. Charles Purton 
Cooper, I am now in possession. It consists of four quarto volumes, beautifully 
written by Mr. Jodderell, an eminent Chancery barrister. He often does more jus- 
tice to Lord Hardwicke than Atkyns or Vesey, Sen.; and I am told that, upon a 
reference to the register’s book, he is found to be more accurate. 

§ It seems strange to us, who see reports of all judgments in print almost as soon 
as they are delivered, that none of Lord Hardwicke’s were printed till after he had 
_ resigned the Great Seal. The newspapers and magazines of that day thought as 


LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE., 69 


“ Vates sacri” prevent his name from perishing,—from their condensa- 
tion, they do not render justice to his copious illustrations, his lucid 
arrangement, and his elegance of diction, Yet they give us the pith 
and substance of his discourses in pronouncing his decrees, and they 
afford an exquisite treat to the scientific reader. From these stores | 
am rather embarrassed with my riches, and,—instead of writing a 
volume to give a sketch of Lord Hardwicke’s new doctrines, with the 
restrictions and expansions of what had been before laid down,—being 
confined to the selection of a few detached points decided by him, [ am 
much afraid of being thought to resemble the ZyoAadrimos in Hierocles, 
who, to prove the fine proportions of a building, produced a_ brick 
which he had taken from it. The Equity lawyer who feels the little 
justice I do to the object of his adoration, will best appreciate the 
difficulty of my task. 

Lord Hardwicke established the rule that persons, though not 
Christians, if they believe in a divinity, may be sworn according to the 
ceremonies of their religion, and that the evidence given by them so 
sworn is admissible in courts of justice, as if, being Christians, they 
had been sworn upon the Evangelists. This subject first came before 
him in Ramkissenseat vy. Barker, where, in a suit for an account 
against the representatives of an East India Governor, the plea being 
overruled that the plaintiff was an alien infidel, a cross bill was filed, 
and an objection being made that he could only be sworn in the usual 
form, a motion was made that the words in the commission, ‘ on the 
holy Evangelists,” should be omitted, and that the [Dec. 1739.] 
commissioners should be directed to administer an oath 
to him in the manner most binding on his conscience.— Lord Chancellor. 
“T have often wondered, as the dominions of Great Britain are so 
extensive, that there has never been any rule or method in cases of this 
sort. All persons who believe a God are capable of an oath ; and what 
is universally understood by an oath is, that the person who takes it 
imprecates the vengeance of God upon him if the oath he takes is false. 
It was upon this principle that the Judges were inclined to admit the 
Jews who believed a God according to our notion of a God, to swear 
upon the Old Testament; and Lord Hale very justly observes, ‘ it is a 
wise rule in the kingdom of Spain, that a heathen and idolator should 
be sworn upon what he thinks is the most sacred part of his religion.’ 
In order to remove the difficulties in this case, I shall direct that the 
words, ‘on the holy Evangelists,’ be left out.—The next considgration 
is, what words must be inserted in their room? On the part of the 
plaintiff in the cross bill, it is desired that I should appoint a solemn 


little of the Court of Chancery as of the Court of Pekin. The first volume of 
Atkyns did not come out till 1757; nor the second till 1767: The first edition of 
Vesey, Sen., was published in 1771. : 

At that time MS. notes were much quoted ; and counsel depended on recollection, 
—which had this advantage, that it always made the ease recollected, and the case 
at bar on all fours. There are decisions of Lord Hardwicke to be found in Strange, 
Ambler, Barnardiston, Ridgeway, and West, published subsequently. 


70 REIGN OF GEORGE IL. 


form for the oath: [ think this very improper, because I may possibly 
direct a form that is contrary to the notions of religion entertained by 
the Gentoo people. I will, therefore, direct that the commissioners 
may administer such oath in the most solemn manner, as in their dis- 
cretion shall seem meet; and if the person, upon the usual oath being 
explained to him, shall consent to take it, and the commissioners 
approve of administering it (for he may perhaps be a Christian con- 
vert), the difficulty is removed; or if they should think proper to 
administer another eath, that then they shall certify to the Court what 
was done by them,—and afterwards will come the proper time to con- 
trovert the validity of such an oath, and to take the opinions of the 
Judges upon it, if the Court should have any doubt.”* 
The point was afterwards finally settled in the great case of Omy- 
chund v. Barker, where a similar commission to examine 
[Nov. 1744.] ~. ots a : : 
witnesses having issued, the Commissioners certified 
** That they had sworn the witnesses examined under it in the presence 
of a Bramin or priest of the Gentoo religion, and that each witness 
touched the hand of the Bramin,—this being the most solemn form in 
which oaths are administered to witnesses professing the Gentoo 
religion.” Objection was made that the depositions so taken could not 
be read in evidence ; and on account of the magnitude of the question, 
the Lord Chancellor called in the assistance of the three chiefs of the 
common law Courts.—After very long, learned, and ingenious argu- 
ments, which may be perused with pleasure, they concurred in the 
opinion that the depositions were admissible-——Lord Chancelior, ‘“ As 
this is a case not only of great expense, but of great consequence, it 
will be expected that I should not decide without giving my reasons for 
the decision I am to pronounce. It is certified to us that these wit- 
nesses believe in the being of a God, and in his providence; and we 
know that they appealed to his favour‘or vengeance in the manner in 
which they considered the most solemn. The first author I shall 
mention is Bishop Sanderson, ‘ De Jurisjuramenti Obligatione.’ ‘ Jura- 
mentum,’ says he, ‘est affirmatio religiosa.’ All that is necessary to an 
oath is an appeal to the Supreme Being, as thinking him the rewarder 
of truth and avenger of falsehood. This is not contradicted by any 
writer that I know of but Lord Coke, who has taken upon him to insert 
the word ‘ Christian,’ and he alone has grafted this word into an oath. 
As to. other writers they are all concurring (vid. Puff. lib. 4. c. 2, s. 
4). Dr. Tillotson, in his sermon upon the lawfulness of oaths, taking 
a text which applies to all nations and all men, ‘an oath for confirma- 
tion is to them an end of all strife,’ (Heb. vi. 16,) says, ‘the necessity 
of religion to the support of human society, in nothing appears more 
evidently than in this, that the obligation of an oath, which is so neces- 
sary for the maintenance of peace and justice among men, depends 
wholly upon the sense and belief of a Deity.’ The next thing I shall 
notice is the form of the oath. It is laid down by all writers that the 


*1 Atk, 19. 


LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE., re | 


outward act is not essential to the oath, Sanderson is of that opinion, 
and so is Tillotson in the same sermon. ‘ As for the ceremonies in use 
among us in the taking of oaths, they aremot found in Scripture, for 
this was always matter of liberty: and several nations have used 
several rites and ceremonies in their oaths,’ Secondly, whether, upon 
special circumstances, such evidence may be admitted according to the 
law of England? The judges and sages of the law have laid it down 
that there is but one general rule of evidence, ‘ Zhe best the nature of 
the case will admit. The first ground Judges have gone upon in 
departing from strict rules, is an absolute necessity ; then a presumed 
necessity. Writings subscribed by witnesses are to be proved by those 
witnesses, but if they are all dead, the proof of one of their hands is 
sufficient. Where the original is lost a copy may be admitted ; if there 
be no copy, then the proof by witnesses who have read the deed, 
although the law abhors the memory of man for evidence of that which 
is written. Persons of the Gentoo religion must be admitted in Courts 
of Justice in their own country to prove facts and’transactions within 
their own knowledge. One of the parties changing his domicile, and 
suing here, can he deprive his opponent of evidence which would have 
been admissible had he stied in the country where the cause of action 
arose? Suppose a heathen should bring an action at common law, and 
the defendant should file a bill for a discovery, will anybody say that 
the plaintiff at law may not be admitted to put in an answer according 
to his own form ofan oath? otherwise the injunction for not putting in 
the answer would be perpetual, and would bea manifest denial of justice. 
This is the view of the subject taken by Lord Stair, Puffendorf, and 
other jurists. It has been the wisdom of all nations to administer such 
oaths as are agreeable to the religious notions of the person taking 
them. ‘This course does not in the slightest degree affect the conscience 
of the persons administering the oath, and is no adoption by them of 
the religion conformed to by one of its votaries. Concurring in opinion 
with my Lords the Judges that these depositions are admissible, [ do 
order that the objection to them be overruled, and that they be now read 
as evidence.”* 

Lord Hardwicke settled some important questions respecting literary 
property. ‘Che infamous Edmund Curle had printed a volume of pri- 
vate letters to and from Pope, who immediately applied for an injunc- 
tion. There had been hitherto no instance of a Court of Equity inter- 
fering under such circumstances, and the defendant’s counsel argued 
that Mr. Pope had parted with all property in his own letters which he 
had sent to his correspondents ; that he never had acquired any property 
in those which he had received; that there could be no property in the 
letters the defendant had printed, as they were not written for publica- 
tion, and the statute of Anne for protecting copyright did not extend to 
them.—Lord Chancellor, * As to the first objection, that where a man 
writes a letter, it is in the nature of a gift to the receiver, | am of 
opinion that the receiver only acquires a qualified interest in it. The 


* 1 Atk, 21-50 ; Phillipps on Evidence, 9. 


79 REIGN OF GEORGE II. 


paper on which it is written may belong to him, but the composition 
does not become vested in him as property, and he cannot publish it 
against the consent of the writer. Then, as to the objection, that the 
statute does not apply to these letters, because ‘they are on familiar 
subjects, containing little more than inquiries after the health of friends, 
and not deserving the name of a learned work,’ I am of opinion that 
we cannot inquire into their nature or merits, and that the bookseller 
who has published them cannot avail himself of their frivolity if they 
were frivolous.* Bua it is certain that no works have done more ser- 
vice to mankind than those which have appeared in this shape upon 
familiar subjects, and which, perhaps, were never intended to be pub- 
lished. ‘This it is which renders them so valuable; for I must confess, 
for my own part, that letters which are very elaborately written, and 
originally intended for the press, are generally the most insignificant, 
and very little worth any person’s reading. However, as for the letters 
in this volume written zo Mr. Pope, I think that he cannot be heard to 
complain. ‘They may possibly be published with the authority of the 
writers of them, and from copies taken before they were sent to him.” 
—The injunction was granted as to the one set of letters, and refused 
as to the other. 

This decision seems very reasonable, but I must own, that I much 
question another rule he laid down with respect to literary property, al- 
though it has not yet been upset. The question arose whether, within 
the period for which copyright is secured to the author, an Abridgment 
of the work may be published without his consent !—Lord Chancellor. 
“When books are only colourably shortened, the statute is evaded, and 
the law will give redress. But this must not be carried so far as to re- 
strain persons from making a real and fair abridgment. An abridg- 
ment may, with great propriety, be called a new book. Not only are 
the paper and printing the abridger’s, but in his task he may show in- 
vention, learning, and judgment. In many cases, abridgments are 
extremely useful, though sometimes they are prejudicial, by curtailing 
and mistaking the sense of the author.” 

Before the passing of the Marriage Act, Lord Hardwicke had much 
trouble with his female wards, for their marriage without his consent 
was valid, and he could only punish those concerned in contriving it. 
Mr. Charles, a clergyman, who married Miss Sophia More, a ward of 
Chancery, without leave, to John Peck, and others who were present 

when she was married, appeared to answer the con- 
[AreiND tial] tempt of the Court.—Lord Chancellor. ‘These are 
mischiefs which want the correction and reformation of the legislature. 
John Ubank must, in the first place, stand committed, who assisted in 


* Q. Whether a man who has pirated a work ought to have been allowed to 
pri that it is libellous or obscene, and therefore not entitled to the protection of 
the law ? 

t 2 Atk, 342. : 

t Gyles v. Wilcock, 2 Atk. 142; and see Lofft, 775; 1 Bro. C. C. 451. I confess 
I do not understand why an abridgment tending to injure the reputation, and to 
lessen the profits of the author, should not be considered an invasion of his property. 


LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE. 73 


conducting Miss More out of her guardian’s house, and gave her away 
at the wedding. The giving away a woman as her father, though not 
essential, is a “custom or ceremony which clergymen always require.” 
Having dealt with others upon the consideration whether they were 
concerned in the marriage, knowing the infant to be a ward of Court, 
he comes to Mr. Charles. ‘ Next comes the priest. It is surprising 
that the canons of the Church, with respect to marriage, are so little 
regarded by the clergy, but for a violation of them I have no right to 
pronounce sentence, ‘and Mr, Charles does not seem to me to have been 
at all concerned in the contrivance or design of doing this wrongful act : 
therefore he is not guilty of a contempt of the Court; but I would re- 
commend him to be more cautious for the future.”* 

On another occasion he severely punished persons concerned in clan- 
destinely marrying a girl of fifteen with a large fortune to the son of a 
nobleman’s steward, who was under twenty, although they were igno- 
rant of her being a ward of Court.—Lord Chancellor, “ Lord Ossul- 
ston, by his affidavit, admits, that at the request of Pearson he procured 
Barry, the parson, to celebrate this marriage, and he denies knowledge 
of any orders of the Court. It is positively sworn by the petitioner that 
the match was made by the contrivance of Pearson with Lord Ossulston ; 
that Lord Ossulston went to London and fetched the parson from the 
Fleet for a fee of one hundred guineas, and that Lord Ossulston being 
present at the marriage gave away the lady as a father, in a room at 
Up Park. Barry, the parson, having been committed by a former order, 
let Pearson, Mary Tench, the maid-servant, and Lord Ossulston be now 
committed to the Fleet for their contempt.” 

One of the nicest points which ever came before Lord Hardwicke, 
was how a widow is affected by her husband in his lifetime having 
pledged her paraphernalia. Lord Londonderry had given Lady Lon- 
donderry a diamond necklace, and afterwards pledged it as a collateral 
security for 1000/., with a power to sell it for 15002. After his death 
the question arose whether the necklace ought not to be redeemed out of 
his personal estate for her benefit—Lord Chancellor. ‘*' The necklace 
is not to be considered as given for the separate use of the wife. I have 
admitted that a husband may make such a gift, but where he expressly 
gives jewels to a wife to be worn as ornaments of her person, they are 
to be considered only as paraphernalia, and it would be of bad conse- 
quence to consider them otherwise, for if they were a gift to her separate 
use, she might dispose of them absolutely in his lifetime, which would 
be contrary to his intention. But in this case it will be the same to 
Lady Londonderry, if she can prove that she wore the necklace as an 
ornament of her person on birthdays and other public occasions,— which 
it has been proved she did. The question arises ‘ whether there was an 
alienation of it by the husband in his lifetime, the husband having a 
right to alienate his wife’s paraphernalia in his lifetime, although he 
cannot deprive her of them by his will?’ Here there was a pledge with 


* 2 Atk. 157. 
t+ Edes y. Brenton, West. 348, The Marriage Act was not passed till 1753, 


74 REIGN OF GEORGE II. 


a power of sale, and at the husband’s death the necklace remained 
unredeemed and unsold. I am of opinion that this was not an aliena- 
tion, and that his personal estate being sufficient to redeem the pledge, 
and pay all his debts, she shall be entitled to have it redeemed and 
delivered to her.”* ’ 

This decision in favour of the female sex was supposed to be over- 
balanced by the alleged harshness of another, whereby a lady was com- 
pelled, in answer to a bill of discovery, to disclose a fact which sub- 
jected her to a forfeijure. A husband left the whole of his personal 
estate to his wife, “but if she married again, his brother to have a 
moiety of it.” The brother filed a bill against her for an account of 
the moiety, and for a discovery whether she was married again? She 
demurred to the discovery, relying on the case of Chancy v. Tahourdin, 
1 Atk., 392.—Lord Chancellor. ‘That was a forfeiture of the whole 
portion, the testator being a father bound by nature to provide for a 
child. This is to be considered a conditional limitation to the wife if she 
remained single, and she must show whether the condition has been 
performed. She must answer, whatever may be the consequence.’ 

He held, with much reluctance, that a bond given for payment of an 
annuity to a young woman, who, living in the family of a married man, 
had been seduced by him, was void.—Lord Chancellor, ‘This case 
is new. The Court has sustained such a bond as premium pudicitie, 
where a young woman previously of good character, has been provided 
for by her seducer,—their cohabitation ceasing. But I know no in- 
stance occurring where the obligor was a married man. This circum- 
stance differs the case from those in which the Court has gone great 
lengths to make provision for such unfortunate persons. When a young 
woman appearing to be modest submits to improper solicitation, she is 
much to blame, but if the man be single, she knows the crime is not so 
aggravating as adultery ; she may be inclined to suppose that he will be 
induced to marry her; there may be such a promise which cannot be 
legally proved ; where both parties are single, there is room for pre- 
suming such a promise; the subsequent marriage takes off from the 
enormity of the offence, and in most countries of Europe even legitt- 
mates the issue, At all events, under these circumstances, people are 
aware that they are doing that which is not of such bad consequence in 
families. Whereas when a man takes and keeps a mistress under the 
nose of his wife, who thereupon leaves him, that is such a crime as 
stares every one in the face. The unhappy plaintiff knew too well the 
situation of her seducer, and if the real consideration for the bond had 
been stated on the face of it, it would have been void at law. In Lady 
Annandale v. Harris, Eq. Cases Abridged, 87, the commerce was 
wholly after the death of the first wife, and before the second marriage. 
This Court ought not to sanction what would be of bad example in the 
case of married persons, and encourage people to enter into agreements 
of this kind. Had she not known that he was married,as if the wife 


* 3 Atk. 393, +3 Atk. 260. 


LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE. 75 


had been at a distance, or any imposition had been practised upon her, 
she might be entitled to relief. But she entered info the family, the hus- 
band and wife living together, and she caused a separation between 
them. The Court must endeavour to preserve virtue in families. Let 
the bill be dismissed,—but without costs.”’* 

In the great case of the Earl of Derby v. Duke of Athol, he decided 
that the laws of England do not extend to the Isle of Man.—Lord 
Chancellor, ‘*'This case concerns a very noble and ancient family, 
and perhaps the most honourable inheritance any subject of this kingdom 
can enjoy. Many things are admitted on both sides: that Man is not 
part of the realm of England; parcel only of the King’s crown of 
England ; a distinct dominion now’ under the King’s grants, and so for 
a long time past granted ; held asa feudatory dominion by Liege Homage 
of the Kings of England. I am of opinion that the laws of England as 
such do not extend to it; neither our common law, nor statute law, 
unless it be expressly named or clearly included in some general 
legislative enactment. Though the Isle of Man be granted under the 
Great Seal of England, English law does not necessarily prevail in it. 
The Great Seal of England operates in all territories subject to the 
crown of England whatever their laws may be. The King can grant, 
under the Great Seal of England, lands in Ireland, in the plantations, 
and in Guernsey and Jersey, because they are all parts of his crown.” 
He then enters at great length into the history of the Isle of Man, show- 
ing in a masterly manner how it was to be governed as a separate 
dominion, subject to the prerogative of the King and the supreme 
power of Parliament. 

There are no regular reports of the decisions in the House of Lords 
on appeals from the Court of Sessions till the time of Lord Chancellor 
Eldon. I am enabled, however, to give a statement of the most im- 
portant case which came before Lord Hardwicke from Scotland, that of 
** Gordon of Park,” respecting the effect of attainder for treason on the 
descent of entailed estates. Sir James Gordon had entailed the Barony 
of Park, with prohibitory, irritant, and resolutive clauses, on his eldest 
son William, and his heirs male; whom failing, on his second son 
James, and his heirs male, &c. After the death of the entailer, his 
eldest son, Sir William Gordon, engaged in the rebellion of 1745, and 
escaped to France, but was attainted. ‘The question then arose as to 
who was entitled to his estate,—the Crown, or his younger brother, 
Captain James Gordon, who had remained loyal to King George? An 
_ act of the Scotch Parliament, passed in 1690,¢ had provided that 
attainder for treason should not affect entailed estates; but the United 
Parliament had introduced the English law of treason into Scotland, 
and enacted that “all persons convicted or attainted of high treason in 
Scotland should be subject and liable to the same corruption of blood, 
pains, penalties, and forfeitures, as persons convicted or attainted of high 


* Priest vy. Parrot, 2 Ves. Sen. 160. +2 Ves. Sen, 337-357. t C, 33; 


76 REIGN OF GEORGE II. 


treason in England.”* The Scotch Judges unanimously held that Sir 
William Gordon having forfeited the estate, it should immediately, as 
if he had died without issue male, descend to his brother James. ‘The 
Lord Advocate having appealed against this decision, Lord Hardwicke 
called in the assistance of the English Judges, to whom he submitted 
certain questions, moulding the terms of the Scottish tenures as nearly 
as he could to those of England. He then, in accordance with their 
opinion, advised a reversal, saying, ‘I am sorry to be obliged to differ 
from the unanimous alecree of the Supreme Court in Scotland, so much 
entitled to our respect. But the learned senators of the College ot 
Justice are not very familiar with our law of treason, which has been 
introduced into their country, and they may unconsciously be inclined 
to adhere to the law which they had to administer before the Union. I 
do not see how the attainder of the heir of tailzie in possession can be 
considered as equivalent to his death without issue. He is not a mere 
tenant for life; he is the ‘ fiar:’ the fee is in him, and our doctrine of 
remainders and reversions does not strictly apply ;—so that, on a 
rigid construction of the 7 Anne, c. 21, on his attainder, there is room 
for contending that there ought to be an absolute forfeiture to the crown 
of the entailed lands, to the entire extinction of the rights of all sub- 
stitutes in the entail. But the milder interpretation of the Act will 
be to hold that the heir of tailzie has in him, and forfeits by his attain- 
der, the same interest as tenant in tail in England—so that upon his 
attainder the Crown takes the lands during his lifetime and while 
there exists issue who would take by descent through him,—leaving 
other substitutes in the entail unaffected. I would, therefore, advise 
your Lordships, reversing the interlocutor appealed against, to declare 
that the Barony of Park is forfeited to the Crown during the life of Sir 
William Gordon, and during the existence of issue male who through 
him would be inheritable thereto—but that upon his death and the 
extinction of such issue, the remainder in favour of the respondent 
Captain James Gordon will take effect.” 

But I am sadly afraid that however interesting such matters are to 
the jurisconsult, they are very tiresome to the bulk of my readers, male 
and female; and I hasten to survey Lord Hardwicke in another sphere. 

It is mortifying to consider, that although he deserves such high 
commendation for his upright and enlightened administration of justice, 

* 7 Anne, c, 21. 

+ Morr. Dec. 1728; Kames’s Elucidations, 371; Sandford on Entails, 177. Lord 
Kames highly disapproved of this decision, saying, “a remainder with respect to 
forfeiture is introduced into our law hitherto unknown in Scotland ;” and Lord Hard- 
wicke had a sharp correspondence with him upon the subject. But I know not that 
a better rule could have been laid down.—A curious question subsequently arose as to 
the application of it. Sir William Gordon, after his attainder, married, and had two 
sons born abroad. On his death, Captain James again claimed the estate, on the 
ground that as these children were aliens, and could not inherit, the substitution in 
his favour had come into,effect. The Court of Session decided against him; but he 


succeeded on an appeal to the House of Lords; and, in the lifetime of his nephews, 
became “ Laird of Park.” 


LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE. 77 


he cannot be praised for any attempt to amend our institutions by legis- 
lation. During the twenty years of his sway, the, act requiring legal 
proceedings to be carried on in the English language, passed by Lord 
Chancellor King, still remained the most recent improvement, and the 
principle was acted upon which was soon after brought forward by 
Blackstone in his “ Commentaries,” that our whole juridical system 
had reached absolute perfection. The only change introduced was a 
great addition to the severity of the penal code. Many felonies were 
now rendered capital, which before were only liable to be punished by 
transportation, and many frauds which at Common Law were simple 
misdemeanours, such as forgery of deeds and negotiable instruments, 
being made capital felonies, in practice were always punished with 
death—although this bloody code did not reach its full measure of 
atrocity till towards the close of the reign of George III., when it was 
defended and eulogised by Lord Eldon. 

In pursuance of an address of the House of Commons to the Crown 
in the year 1732, a commission had been appointed to inquire into all 
fees in all the superior Courts both of Law and of Equity, and after a 
period about as long as was employed in the siege of Troy, the Com- 
missioners presented a report, in which they point out various abuses, 
and suggest various amendments—with very great tenderness to existing 
interests. [ will present as a specimen—what they say of the practice 
of writing only a few scattered words ona folio sheet of paper, the fee 
being so much a folio—laughed at by Hudibras. 


“ 





To make twixt words and lines large gaps 
Wide as meridians in maps, 

To squander paper and spare ink, 

Or cheat men of their words, some think,” 


‘“‘ A great part of the expense of the suitors,” says the timorous re- 
port, “arises from the copies of the proceedings, the bills, answers, 
interrogatories, depositions, orders, and decrees, being often very long, 
and the copies of them necessary to be taken by the complainant or 
defendant, and sometimes by both, having but six words to a line and 
fifteen lines in a sheet, the expense of taking out such copies amounts 
to a very great sum of money. How this great expense to the suitor 
may be lessened, whether by reducing the length of such proceedings, 
by leaving out the immaterial and unnecessary parts of them, or by 
inserting more words in a line or more lines in a sheet, for which there 
is more than sufficient room in every sheet, or by reducing the fee 
. usually taken for such copies, or by what other ways or means, the 
Commissioners humbly submit to the consideration of those who may 
be better able to judge, and have authority to provide suitable expedients 
and remedies, and to establish proper regulations whereby justice may 
be administered to your Majesty’s subjects with as much despatch and 
as little expense as conveniently may be.” * 

But the prevailing abuses withstood all the long labours of the 


* This Report, bearing date 8th November, 1740, is signed by Lord Hardwicke 
himself, who had been appointed a commissioner when at the bar. 


78 REIGN OF GEORGE II. 


Commissioners ;—‘* Non anni domuere decem ;’’—no act of Parliament 
was passed, no orders were made to correct them. ‘The length of the 
proceedings might have been reduced; more words might have been 
inserted in a line and more’ lines in a sheet, and the fees for the copies 
might have been lowered. But the proceedings continued equally 
prolix; neither were there more words in a line or more lines ina 
sheet ; the copy money per folio continued equally exorbitant, and no 
ways or means weve discovered to save the suitor from being plundered. 
The Judge and all the officers of the Court were paid by fees, and 
Lord Hardwicke could not have made a vigorous effort to regulate them 
without some sacrifice of his own pecuniary gains, and without danger 
of incurring ill will from others. 

That I may clear the way for following him in his political career, 
which must be more interesting to the general reader, I have now only 
to consider how he executed that most important function of a Chan- 
cellor—the appointment of Judges and law officers of the Crown,—and 
here he is entitled to unmixed praise. Lee, Willes, and Parker, with 
able puisnes, presided satisfactorily under his auspices in the Common 
Law Courts, and the bar could not have furnished better men for the 
officers of Attorney and Solicitor-General than Ryder, Strange, and 
Murray. It is objected to him that ‘ he prevented the creation of law 
Lords whereby his power in the House of Peers he apprehended might 
be diminished ;” “ the peerage of Lee, Ryder, Willes, and even of Par- 
ker, Chief Baron,” says Cooksey, ‘‘ though acknowledged due to their 
long services of the state, were delayed or denied : thus he remained the 
sole law Lord during the whole term of his Chancellorship.”* ‘There is 
here, however, considerable exaggeration. Ryder’s patent was too long 
delayed, and he unfortunately died before the Great Seal was put to it. 
The others, though respectable men, had never gained great distinction 
in Parliament or in their profession, and law peerages ought not to be 
(as they have sometimes been) wantonly and inconveniently multiplied. 

When we view Lord Hardwicke as a magistrate, it might be supposed 
that he could have had no political functions to disturb him, but now 
that we are to view him immersed in politics, we might suppose that he 
had nothing to think of but how he might please the King, and not 
offend the heir apparent—how he might intrigue to keep up ministerial 
majorilies—how he might assist in modelling measures to make the 
session. come smoothly to a conclusion—how on a rupture in the 
cabinet he might reunite some of its scattered fragments,—and how he 
might make all things work together for his own aggrandizement. It 
will be found that to advance the interests of his party and of his family 
he displayed great shrewdness and dexterity. His character as a 
statesman, about which he was very solicitous, is more doubtful. ‘ Men 
are apt to mistake,” says Lord Chesterfield, “ or at least to seem to 
mistake, their own talents—in hopes, perhaps, of misleading others to 
allow them that which they are conscious they do not possess. Thus 


* Cooksey, 76. 


LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE. 79 


Lord Hardwicke valued himself more on being a great minister of 
state, which he certainly was not, than upon being. great magistrate, 
which he certainly was. All his notions were clear, but none of them 
were great. Good order and domestic details were his proper depart- 
ment: great and shining parts of government, though not above his 
parts to conceive, were above his timidity to undertake.” 

From the disputes in the Royal Family, he had a very difficult and 
disagreeable task assigned to him at the very moment when he received 
the Great Seal. George IJ., who had been disliked by his own father, 
actually hated his own son. Prince Frederick being at last permit- 
ted to come to England long after the accession of his family to the 
throne, now headed a powerful party in opposition to the government, 
and was banished from Court, without being allowed a sufficient income 
decently to maintain himself and his wife and children. A motion was 
to be made in the House of Commons by his friends, for an address to 
the crown to assign him 100,000/. a year out of the Civil List. Ac- 
cording to the court scheme, this was to be counteracted by a proposal 
to Parliament to vote him 50,0002, a year, and at the same time he was 
to be reprimanded for his factious proceedings. A controversy arose 
with respect to the bearer of the reprimand, and the matter happened to 
be debated at the very cabinet at which Walpole had announced that 
Lord Hardwicke was to be the successor of Lord Talbot. Some one 
proposed that the new Chancellor should be the messenger. This was 
unanimously agreed to, and he was summoned to attend a council next 
day at twelve o’clock to receive the Great Seal. Accordingly, while he 
was waiting in the antechamber at St. James’s, with the Dukes of New- 
castle and Argyle, the Earl of Wilmington, and _,, 
other Privy Councillors, Sir Robert Walpole came Reels hd Sha) 
out of the King’s chamber in a great hurry, holding a paper in his* 
hand, and read to them the draught of a message, in his own hand- 
writing, and acquainted them that, “‘it was the King’s pleasure that 
the Lord Chancellor, accompanied by the Lord President, Lord Steward, 
and Lord Chamberlain, should immediately carry it to the Prince.” 
Lord Hardwicke, expecting nothing but smiles and congratulations on 
this auspicious day, was greatly shocked at such a commencement of 
his cancellarian career, and wished that he had allowed Fazakerley to 
be made a Whig. What added to his embarrassment was, that the 
King was then labouring under a low fever, from which some foretold 
that he would not recover. ‘To the expressions in the reprimand “ the 
undutiful measures which his Majesty is informed your Royal Highness 
intends to pursue,” he positively objected ; but it was replied by the 
Minister that the King insisted on the word “undutiful,” and that he 
had with great difficulty been dissuaded from using harsher terms. A 
concession was made, however, by changing “ intends” into ‘* hath been 
advised to pursue.” Still Lord Hardwicke took Walpole aside and 
expostulated with him on the hardship of making such a painful errand 
his introduction to the heir apparent. The Minister answered that he 
had hinted this to the King, as far as he durst venture in so nice a case, 


80 REIGN OF GEORGE IL. 


but the King prevented all further discussion, by exclaiming, ‘* My 
Chancellor shall go.” To soften matters, it was agreed that the whole 
cabinet should attend in a body when the message was to be delivered, 
but Sir Robert contrived to slip away—on pretence that his presence 
was indispensably required in the House of Commons. Lord Hard- 
wicke was then admitted into the King’s closet, and received the Great 
Seal, with many gracious expressions of royal favour, but without a 
word respecting the reprimand. Having taken the usual oaths, he retired 
to make himself, as he apprehended, for ever odious to the Prince, who 
might, in a few weeks, be upon the throne. He had a wonderful escape, 
however, from the “ forlorn hope” on which he had been put ; Frederick 
considered it politic on this occasion to be very civil to the Chancellor, 
and to use dutiful language towards the King: and he was swept off to 
an early grave, while the Great Seal remained in the firm grasp of its 


present possessor.* 
; A debate on the subject arose in the House of 
ear EA Lords the very day that Lord Hardwicke took his 
place on the woolsack as Chancellor; but he left the defence of the 
government to the Duke of Newcastle, and took no part in the proceed- 
ings beyond communicating the King’s message to the Prince, and the 
Prince’s answer.t 
The first occasion of the new Chancellor’s coming forward in debate 
was to defend the bill to punish the citizens of Edinburgh for the mur- 
der of Captain Porteous,—by repealing the city charter, by razing the city 
gates, and by abolishing the city guard. This measure being furiously 
attacked by the Duke of Argyle, who, in answer to the threat of the 
Queen as Regent to turn Scotland into a “ hunting ground,” had said 
‘“he must go down to prepare his hounds,” Lord Hardwicke justi- 
fied all its enactments, observing, in answer to the argument derived 
from the ancient loyalty of the citizens of Edinburgh, that ‘the merit 
of ancestors in a former age can never atone for the degeneracy of their 
posterity.” This was considered by Macullamore a reflection on him- 
self and his clan, and called forth from him a statement of their ser- 
vices in placing and retaining the present royal family on the throne. 
The Lord Chancellor declared, ‘‘ that the noble Duke had mistook his 
meaning; that he entertained the highest opinion of the noble Duke’s 
candour and loyalty, as well as of his talents and gallantry, and that it 
never was his intention to insinuate anything to the disadvantage of any 
Campbell whatsoever.” ‘The division was in favour of the government, 
but the bill was so flagrantly unjust, and was so strenuously opposed 
by all the Scotch members in both Houses of Parliament, and by the 
whole Scotch nation, that the minister prudently abandoned it, and it 
was turned into a bill to impose a fine of 20002. on the city of Edin- 
burgh for the benefit of Captain Porteus’s widow. ‘* All these fierce 
debates ending only in making the fortune of an old cook-maid, for such 


* Com. Walp. iii. 537. t 9 Parl. Hist. 1448, 


LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE. 81 


had Mrs. Porteous been before the Captain made her a lady.”*—A me- 
lancholy event was impending, from which important consequences 
were apprehended, 


CHAPTER CXXXII. 


CONTINUATION OF THE LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE TILL THE RESIG- 
NATION OF SIR ROBERT WALPOLE. 


In the end of this year Lord Hardwicke was much alarmed by the 
death of Queen Caroline, on whose great influence with [ 1737 
the King, notwithstanding his infidelities to her, the shut ‘| 
ministry was supposed chiefly to depend; but her dying recommenda- 
tion of Walpole sunk deep into the King’s mind, and his Majesty’s 
health being completely re-established, the opposition party melted 
away. Horace Walpole says, that, “on the Queen’s death, Lord 
Chancellor Hardwicke went deep into the scheme of governing through 
the Princess Emily ; this scheme was to be built on the ruin of Sir 
Robert Walpole, who had no other trouble to make it miscarry than in 
making the King say, Pho/”’} But this is a mere imaginary plot. 
From the hour of Caroline’s decease the King lavished greater kindness 
than ever on Walpole, and it was not till long after that Newcastle or 
Hardwicke thought of his removal. 

The assailants of the government in the House of Lords, although 
not numerous, were active and unscrupulous. When the “ Mutiny 
Bill” was brought forward in the session of 1738, : 

Lord Carteret moved that the number of the forces to [May 2, 1788.] 
be kept on foot for the British empire should be reduced from 18,000 
to 12,000 men; and he was warmly supported by Lord Chesterfield 
and Lord Bathurst, who, like him, declaimed against the danger to 
liberty from a standing army, laughed at the idea of there being 
longer anytbing to be apprehended from the Jacobites, and contended 
that the best mode of allaying the prevailing discontents would be by 
disbanding every regiment in the service. The Duke of Newcastle 
made such a sorry figure in attempting to answer their sophistries, that 
before the debate closed the Lord Chancellor thought it proper to leave 
the woolsack, and he made a speech which, even from the imperfect 
report of it, appears to have been marked by uncommon excellence. 
Having pointed out the serious apprehension to be entertained from 
foreign invasion, and still more from internal disturbances, he thus pro- 
ceeded : “* But, say some Lords, ‘ al/ the discontents we now complain 


* See “ Tales of my Grandfather,” and “ Heart of Midlothian.” I cannot justify: 
the manner in which the Captain came to his end, but no true Scotsman can sin- 
cerely regret it. 

+t Memoirs of Ten last Years of George IJ. 

VOL. V. 6 


g2 REIGN OF GEORGE II. 
of arise from your keeping up such an army. Disband but your 
army, or a great part of it, and the people will be satesfied.’ 'Vhis, in 
my opinion, my Lords, would be like a man throwing away his arms 
in order to be reconciled with his enemy,—which I am sure no man of 
courage or prudence would do. The recent riots which caused such 
alarm in the metropolis, and all over the country, have been produced 
by useful acts of the legislature for the erection of turnpike gates, and 
to put down the,peastly excesses of gin-drinking. The real danger to 
liberty arises from the machinations of desperate and ambitious men, 
who wish at all hazards to get into their own hands the supreme power 
of the state, under pretence of being attached to the exiled royal family, 
and who are ready to turn to their own account the delusions which 
may prevail among the people. If the noble Lords who ridicule our 
apprehensions feel none, my apprehensions are only the greater. My 
Lords, I warn you, that before long an attempt will be made to sub- 
vert our present happy establishment. Notwithstanding the uninter- 
rupted peace and increasing prosperity which the nation has enjoyed 
since the accession of the present royal family, for reasons which I 
cannot explain, discontents with the government are now general and 
deep, and without prudence and energy on our part these discontents 
will soon lead to open rebellion. The violence, the oppression, the 
subversion of law, liberty, and religion, which made the nation for a 
brief space almost unanimously concur in the Revolution are forgotten ; 
many are now so ungrateful as to censure that glorious event; many 
are so silly as to think, that by recalling the exiled family they may 
get rid of all fancied grievances, and continue to enjoy all the securities 
for the church and the constitution which the Revolution has achieved. 
While the late King James was alive, the doctrine of ¢ divine right’ 
could not be acted upon without opening our arms to receive him who, 
by his blind bigotry, had brought-us to the brink of destruction ; 
whereas now the scene is changed, and delusive hopes may be enter- 
tained from a young Prince who personally has inflicted no wrong 
although all reflecting men are aware that his family in their exile have 
learned nothing and forgot nothing, and that Popery and slavery would 
be recalled along with them. The small army which is asked is in- 
dispensably necessary for the safety of the well-disposed. They will 
cherish it,—while it is hated by the seditious, because it prevents them 
from spreading war, bloodshed, and desolation over the face of their 
country.”* As soon as the Chancellor had resumed the woolsack the 
House divided, when the motion was negatived by ninety-nine to 
thirty-five. 

After this defeat the opposition made a much more skilful, though a 
very profligate, move. Because the Spaniards objected to our carrying 
on a contraband trade with their American colonies, most frightful 
stories were propagated of their cruelty to our countrymen, of which 
“the fable of Captain Jenkins’s ears” was a fair specimen; and, under 


* 10 Parl. Hist. 555, 561. 


LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE, 83 


colour of taking revenge, there was an eager desire in the nation to fit 
out expeditions for the purpose of capturing their galieons, and seizing 
possession of their gold mines. Here was an opportunity to bring 
obloquy upon the pacific Walpole, who was represented to be “a 
furious mastiff to his own countrymen, but a fawning spaniel to the 
Spaniards.” His opponents determined to give him only the alterna- 
tive of a Spanish war or resignation, and it was generally believed that, 
fond as he was of power, he was fonder of peace, and that his political 
extinction was at hand. With this view certain resolutions were moved 
in the House of Lords, affirming the outrageous conduct of Spain, de- 
nying the right of search which she claimed, and praying that English 
commerce might be protected against her aggressions. The task of 
combating these was cast upon the Chancellor, but he did it feebly and 
ineffectually, hardly venturing to go further than to point out that the 
resolutions were so framed as to condemn the belligerent right to search 
neutral vessels which might be carrying contraband of war—a right 
essential to the maintenance of our own naval ascendency. Finding 
that he was making no impression on the House, he withdrew his oppo- 
sition, and the resolutions passed unanimously.* 

In the following session the same policy was pursued by the opposi- 
tion leaders, whose great object was to attack a preliminary convention 
with Spain, by which Walpole had hoped that all differences might be 
adjusted, and peace might be preserved. They were now encouraged 
by the faithless Duke of Newcastle, who thought this a favourable 
Opportunity for becoming prime minister; and it has been represented 
even that another member of the cabinet, from whom a very different 
line of conduct might have been expected, joined inthe war cry. “ The 
Chancellor, Lord Hardwicke,” says Coxe, ‘* a man of moderation, good 
sense, and candour, was of the same opinion with the Duke of New- 
castle, and spoke with such vehemence in the House of Lords against 
the depredations, and in favour of compulsory measures, that Walpole, 
who stood behind the throne, exclaimed to those who were near him, 
Bravo ! Colonel Yorke, Bravo!” \n justice to his memory, however, 
I am bound to declare that the printed reports of the proceedings of the 
Lords do not show the slightest foundation for this charge, and if they 
are to be relied upon, they effectually repel it. He could not resist the 
motion for hearing witnesses at the bar, so that an opportunity was 
given for Captain Jenkins’s celebrated declaration, (Fen. 1, 1739.] 
that when under the hands of the torturing Spaniards, ee PK aie 
‘*‘ he committed his soul to God, and his cause to his country ;” but in 
the debates on the convention Lord Hardwicke appears to have defended 
it at great length, and boldly and manfully to have attempted to dispel 
the public delusion. He showed, that while we have a right to the free 
navigation of the American seas for the purpose of carrying on an un- 
restrained intercourse with our own colonies, according to the laws 
we are pleased to lay down for the regulation of their commerce, the 


* 10 Parl. Hist. 713, 754 + Coxe’s Walpole, iv. 118; Lord Mahon, ii. 407. 


84 REIGN OF GEORGE IT 


Spaniards had a right to lay down laws to regulate‘the commerce of 
their colonies, and to prevent the carrying on of a contraband trade in 
violation of those laws, 

‘¢ The mode in which these respective rights shall be enjoyed and 
enforced,” said he, “is the fair subject of negotiation and treaty, and 
cannot be satisfactorily adjusted by an appeal toarms. For this reason, 
plenipotentiaries were appointed on both sides, who, if they are permitted 
to proceed, may™”be expected to bring about a settlement for the mutual 
honour and advantage of the two nations, We have just reason to 
complain of the manner in which, in some instances, the Spaniards 
have exercised the right which we cannot dispute they possess; but let us 
try whether we may not obtain indemnity and security, without rushing 
headlong into a war, the result of which cannot certainly be foreseen, 
although the vulgar be captivated by the golden prospects which it is 
supposed to hold out. Having shown that no reasonable objection can 
be made to the treaty now before us, | must beg your Lordships to 
consider the present circumstances of Europe, the peculiar situation of 
this nation, and the relation we stand in to Spain. It must be allowed 
that no nation ought to enter into a war against a neighbouring nation 
for any object which may be attained by peaceable means. Of all 
nations, we ought to be the last unnecessarily and wantonly to engage 
in hostilities. A great part of our people subsist by trade ; our landed 
gentlemen owe a great part of their yearly revenue to the commerce 
and manufactures we carry on. Not only should we, by the wished- 
for war, lose our intercourse with the dominions of Spain, allowed to be 
so profitable, but a shock would be given to our trade with the rest of the 
world. . Considering our heavy debt and many taxes, we are in no very 
good condition for engaging in a dangerous, and expensive, and perhaps 
protracted war. The rest of Europe will not quietly look on and see 
us make conquests in Spanish America, if the fortune of war should at 
the outset be in our favour, The Spaniards would soon be assisted by 
France, and perhaps by other powers we little dream of at present. 
Then think, my Lords, of the numerous party in this country, who, I 
am sorry to say, are so little solicitous about the national glory, that 
they are ready to join an invading army, and to receive a despotic 
master from our natural enemies. Some of them are actuated by the 
hopes of making: or mending their fortunes, some by malice, and an 
unjust hatred of those employed in the administration. There are 
many at present disaffected to the government from principle, but their 
number is decreasing every day. The rising generation see the absurdity 
and ridiculousness of the prejudices in which their parents were bred, 
and in a few years we may expect to witness a general concurrence in 
the principles on which the change of dynasty was found necessary, 
and a general attachment to good order, and to the cause of civil and 
religious liberty. Prudence will, by-and-by, dictate submission even to 
the unprincipled, when they no longer see well-meaning men whom 
they can hope to make the tools of their wicked designs.”* 


* 10 Parl. Hist. 1048, 1147. 


LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE. 85 


I must, therefore, absolve Lord Hardwicke from the charge of con- 
tributing to that madness, which, a few months aftér, [Ocr. 1739 
took possession of the nation, when Walpole, rather than eis oe 
quit office, agreed to a declaration of war against Spain—when, the 
heir apparent to the throne headed the mob in the streets of London, 
drinking “ Success to the War !”—when the treasures of Potosi being 
grasped in anticipation, and the golden dreams of the South Sea again 
deluding the public mind, there were greater rejoicings than followed 
the victories of Blenheim or of Waterloo; and when the conscience- 
stricken minister exclaimed, “They are now ringing their bells ; 
before long they will be wringing their hands.” With that minister 
rests, I think, the greatest share of the disgrace of commencing this war 
—the most unprovoked and unjustifiable in our annals. Walpole’s 
opponents were deeply to blame, and still more were his colleagues, 
who wished, by making him unpopular, to supplant him; but with him 
the responsibility rested, and rather than part with power, even for a 
time, he consented to involve the country in hostilities which he knew 
to be unjust, and which he expected to be disastrous. Had he honestly 
resisted, the nation would speedily have been restored to reason, and he 
would have been restored to power. By tardily yielding to the public 
delusion, he did not recover the popularity he had lost by resistance, 
and he was, ere long, forced into permanent retreat. Fit punishment, 
likewise, fell upon the nation; for, during the contest, although the 
heavy calamities which several times seemed impending were averted, 
the military enterprises which were undertaken produced disappointment 
and disgrace ; we were indebted to chance, and the blunders of our 
enemies, that our shores were not trod by invading armies; a Stuart 
prince being recognised by all Scotland, was within a few days’ march 
of the English metropolis, where there were many friends to receive 
him ; and we were finally obliged to agree to a treaty of peace, by 
which Spain did not make a single concession on the points which had 
been the pretence for hostilities.* 

When Lord Hardwicke had exerted himself to the utmost to avoid a 
rupture with Spain, and had delivered a speech which ought to have 
called forth the exclamation—‘* Well done, Grotius!”’? I do not think 
that he can be much censured for remainiug in office, as his resignation 
would only have made way for some more pliant lawyer; but [ must 
confess that I think he would have done better by remaining quiet in 
Parliament, and watching a favourable opportunity for the restoration of 
peace. But Sir Robert having for the present out-manceuvred his 
opponents by going over to the war party, the now blustering Chan- 


* This is a case in which, as the lawyers say, we have “confitentes reos”—all 
the accused parties pleading guilty. Walpole at the time, with his usual openness, 
admitted that he was doing wrong. ‘Some years after,” says Burke, “it was my 
fortune to converse with many of the principal actors against that minister, and 
with those who principally excited that clamour. None of them, no, not one, did in 
the least defend the measure, or attempt to justify their conduct. ‘They condemned 
it as freely as they would have done in commenting upon any procecding in history 
in which they were totally unconcerned.”—Regicide Peace. 


86 REIGN OF GEORGE II. 


cellor strenuously defended a subsidy to Denmark, that she might 
assist usin the quarrel, and he exclaimed,—‘* Whatever others may say 
who advocate forbearance, | am for instantly entering upon action,’”* 
He had for some time been regarded as the organ of the government in 
the House of Lords, no weight being attached to what fell from the 
Duke of Newcastle, who was ostensibly at the head of it. His Grace 
himself seems to have been aware of his own insignificance there, and 
thus writes to the,Chancellor :—* It is no disagreeable circumstance in 
the high station in which your Lordship is, that every man in the House 
of Lords now knows that yours is the sense of the King’s administration, 
and that their interest goes with their inclinations when they follow 
your Lordship.” + | 

During the Spanish war a discussion arose on a subject of more 
permanent interest—the liberty of the Press,—when Lord Hardwicke 
delivered a speech with which he had taken great pains, and which is 
peculiarly interesting as coming from one who had been ten years 
Attorney-General, and was so long afterwards at the head of the law. 
With a view, as it was thought, of intimidating Pope, who had cruelly 
lampooned Lord Hervey and other Peers, and kept the whole House 
in a state of apprehension, a complaint was made against) a very 
inferior poet, Paul Whitehead, who had recently published a satire 
called «‘ Manner,” reflecting upon several Peers, and whose commit- 
ment to Newgate would not have excited much public sympathy. The 
author absconded ; but Dodsley, his publisher, appearing at the bar, a 
motion was made that he should be taken into custody of the Usher of 
the Black Rod, which was opposed by Lord Carteret and Lord Abing- 
don, on the ground that such a proceeding was contrary to the liberty 
of the Press. The Lord Chancellor.— My Lords, the liberty of the 
press ought to be sacred with every Englishman, and I dare answer for 
it will ever be so with your Lordships. But I am afraid that there is 
nothing less understood than the nature of that liberty. I have often, 
my Lords, desired an opportunity of delivering to your Lordships my 
sentiments upon this subject, and I may be excused if I embrace the 
present. Itis said that the liberty of the press is about to be invaded. I 
know, my Lords, that the liberty of the press is generally taken for a 
liberty to publish every indecency against the most respectable persons 
either in public or in private life; and so strongly does this notion 
prevail, that I have never known an instance of a libeller being prose- 
cuted without a loud cry of oppression, he being considered an im- 
personation of the liberty of the press. But has there been introduced 
into the law of England since the invention of printing, a right of 


* 10 Parl. Hist. 1373, 1383, 1412, 1420. 
+ The Duke of Newcastle to Lord Hardwicke, 1739. 
t “Let Sporus tremble! What? that thing of silk, 
: Sporus, that mere white curd of ass’s milk,” &c. 
§ It is said that Pope really was frightened by the “ brave orts at the pridge,” and 
he certainly was more cautious afterwards in meddling with high names, although 
his malignity to Grub Street continued to increase. 


LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE 87 


publishing to the world any defamatory matter to the prejudice of 
superior, inferior, or equal? Before the art of printing was known in 
Europe, learning was confined to a very few. At that time the copiers 
of books were a separate body of men, and were under particular 
regulations in different countries. When printing was introduced these 
regulations necessarily fell to the ground, and every one for a while 
could communicate his thoughts to the world on any subject till 
printing under new regulations: became an affair of state. Thence, my 
Lords, arose the expression of THE LIBERTY OF THE PRESS, But, my 
Lords, in England the mode of publication made no change in the law 
of defamatory libel. ‘The press acquired no liberty which was not 
known in the most remote times. If anybody, my Lords, is of opinion 
that authors acquired any new privileges when printing was discovered, 
he ought to prove either that the old laws on that subject were repealed, 
or that new ones were made in favour of typographical slander. Cha- 
racter must be protected as much as property, and an invasion of either 
demands an award of compensation, and punishment for the sake of 
public example. It is true, my Lords, that in bad reigns very great 
severities have been inflicted on authors and printers for publishing 
what was harmless or useful; but this only proves that the law was 
abused by power. The law of treason, allowed in this country to be 
wise and merciful, was abused much more; but for that reason a man 
may not imagine the King’s death, or levy war against him with 
impunity. [am very sensible, my Lords, of how much use the press 
was at the time of the Revolution, but the authors who then espoused 
the side of liberty, advanced nothing that was not agreeable to the con- 
stitution ; they were warranted by law for what they wrote, and they 
had the sense of the nation on their side. I must add that the authors, 
who are so justly praised for supporting the Revolution, communicated 
their sentiments with the greatest deference to the persons and cha- 
racters of their adversaries, without any mixture of malice or calumny. 
Let not modern libellers, when called to account in a legal manner, com- 
pare the present government to that of Charles IH. or of James IL, till 
they prove that they write with as-much caution and as much decency 
as those who then lawfully availed themselves of the liberty of the press 
to defend the constitution of their country. The libel we are now con- 
sidering is of the more virulent quality, as the noble Lords libelled 
could not have given any just cause of offence to the author, probably 
not knowing him by sight, and never having heard of his name till it 
was impudently affixed to this infamous publication. I therefore think 
it deserves all the severity of your Lordships’ censure.” Lord Talbot 
(son of the Chancellor) pithily answered :—* My Lords, if this be so, 
in Heaven’s name let those aggrieved by this libel have recourse to the 
inferior Courts of justice, and do not let such a charge lie against us, 
as that we are judges, jury, prosecutors, and parties in the same suit.” 
On a division the motion was carried by 72 to 82, and [am only 
surprised that the minority was so large, or that any noble Lord had 
the courage to divide the House on such a question. Paul Whitehead’s 


88 REIGN OF GEORGE II. 


dull poems had nothing to do with the proceedings of their Lordships as 
a branch of the legislature, while he made free with the manners of 
individual Peers. But at this period no one ever thought of questioning 
any decision of the Lords upon privilege, and the standing order passed 
unanimously, of which I was obliged to move the repeal before I could 
venture to offer to the world my “ Lives of the Chancellors,”’—* that 
no one presume to publish the Lives of any Lords spiritual or temporal, 
deceased, without,the permission of their heirs and executors.”* The 
reckless perversion of privilege to the punishment of private injuries 
which marked the eighteenth century, is very much to be condemned : 
but perhaps the other extreme into which we are inclined to run may 
be more injurious—a refusal to enforce privilege in cases where it is 
essentially necessary to enable the two Houses of Parliament to exercise 
the legislative and inquisitorial functions vested in them for the public 
good, 
Parliament being called together in November to vote supplies for 
the Spanish war, the Chancellor had a very troublesome 
[a. Dp. 1739.] . Wallnole? ws lavwaber 
session, alpole’s enemies now complained of the 
manner in which the war had been commenced, and the manner in 
which it had been conducted, and they were particularly fierce against 
a passage in the King’s speech respecting ‘the heats and animosities 
prevailing throughout the kingdom,” which was construed into a 
reflection on “ his Majesty’s opposition,” who declared themselves to be 
the only true friends to loyalty and order. Newcastle, Hervey, Chol- 
mondely, and Devonshire were no match in debate for Carteret, 
Chesterfield, Bedford, Sandwich, and Argyle, and the Chancellor was 
frequently obliged to leave the woolsack, and to talk on subjects with 
which he was by no means familiar. In the debate on the address, 
the defence of the government rested chiefly upon his shoulders, and he 
contended with some success that his Majesty, as the father of his 
people, hada right to exhort all classes to cultivate mutual love and 
harmony—insinuating at the same time pretty broadly, that the noble 
Lords, whom no measures would content which they did not themselves 
originate and guide as ministers, were ready, for their own selfish ends, 
to endanger the internal tranquillity of the country and the national 
honour.t 
But they had their revenge of him soon after, when the government 
[Fen. 28, 1740.] Hee by inadvertence “ath a message to the House 
of Commons respecting supplies for carrying on the 
war, without any similar message being sent to the House of Lords, 
and the omission being there taken up as a breach of privilege, the 
Chancellor, in a very elaborate speech, contended that ‘‘the message 
was in the nature of an estimate which was exclusively to be submitted 
to the lower House :” but he was unmercifully dealt with by Chesterfield 
and Carteret, who ridiculed with much pleasantry this piece of special- 
pleading sophistry. The ministers did not venture on an attempt directly 


* Standing Orders, No, 113. +11 Parl. Hist. 11, 60, 79. 


LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE. 89 


to negative the vote of censure moved upon them—but carried the pre- 
vious question.* 

The Chancellor was again “ turned out for a day’s sport,” when he 
had to defend the manner in which Admiral Vernon’s expedition had 
been equipped for the attack on Porto Bello, and the whole conduct of 
the war. The Duke of Argyle characterized his speech as “a toying 
with words,” and the learned Lord does seem to have treated the sub- 
ject as if he had been in the Court of Chancery overruling objections to 
the master’s report. The minority rose to 40 against 62, 

At last came the delightful task of declaring in the King’s name that 
Parliament was prorogued. Still the Chancellor 4 
had not the fit BE he expected ; for the King bere eked ou) 
being gone to Germany, there were violent altercations among the 
Lords of the regency, and it was with the greatest difficulty that he 
could prevent Walpole and Newcastle from coming to an open rup- 
ture. 

In the ensuing session of Parliament, he was*called upon repeatedly 
to speak respecting the conduct of the war, the amount of the forces to 
be kept on foot, the reinforcements supplied to Admiral Vernon, and 
the instructions sent to Admiral Haddock ;f but I do not think that his 
speeches, from the briefs delivered to him on these subjects, are of any 
interest, and I at once proceed to a great crisis in his history—the dis- 
missal of Sir Robert. 

Horace Walpole imputes treachery to him on this occasion, and con- 
siders that the ruin of the minister was brought about by his two 
colleagues, the Chancellor and the Duke of Newcastle. After describing 
their supposed attempt to turn him out on the death of the Queen, he 
says: ‘Their next plot was deeper laid, and had more effect; by a 
conspiracy with the chiefs of the opposition they overturned Sir Robert 
Walpole, and in a little time the few of their associates that they had 
admitted to share the spoil.”{—Although it is quite certain that against 
such powerful opponents and such a load of public obloquy, the Premier, 
having completed his twenty years of absolute sway, could not have 
stood much longer, I think there is some foundation for the charge 
against. Newcastle, who, willing to submit to any indignity rather than 
not possess office at all, was ever ready to sacrifice everything (good 
faith included) for the chance of increasing his power. ‘* His name,” 
said Sir Robert, “is perfidy.” ‘‘It would have been strange indeed,” 
writes Macaulay, “if his Grace had been idle when treason was 
hatching.”§ 

“Ch’ i’ ho de’ traditor’ sempre sospetto, 
E Gan fu traditor prima che nato.” 
However, as far as Hardwicke is concerned, the statement is not only 
unsupported by any proof, but is contrary to all probability. He had 


* 11 Parl. Hist. 449-480. 
+ 11 Parl. Hist. 615, 629, 700, 756, 760, 773, 813, 901, 918, 1000, 1016, 1027, 
t “Ten last Years of George II,” p. 139, § Essays, ii. 131, 


90 REIGN OF GEORGE IL 


nothing to gain by a disruption of the ministry, and, although he had 
the good luck to survive it, he must have foreseen the danger that, if 
Pulteney and Carteret were to triumph, they would insist on naming a 
new Chancellor. On the only occasion when the subject was brought 
forward in the House of Lords, in February, 1741, when Lord Carteret 
made his celebrated motion for an address to the King, praying him 
“to dismiss Sir Robert Walpole from his presence and councils ‘for 
ever,” Lord Hardwicke defended his chief with much ability, and 
seemingly, with zéal and sincerity. We have his speech as reported 
by Dr. Johnson for the ‘* Gentleman’s Magazine,” and though a few 
epithets may have been added, to give additional point to an antithesis 
or to round a period, I make no doubt that the report is substantially 
correct. Notwithstanding what has been said about ‘ Johnson’s 
Debates” being the invention of his own brain, it now appears, by com- 
paring them with contemporary notes, particularly Archbishop Secker’s, 
that they contain accurately the sentiments, and often the very words, 
of the different speakers, so that they must have been prepared from 
genuine information, or (what is more probable still) from the notes or 
recollection of the compiler, who may have been actually present when 
they were delivered. On this memorable occasion Lord Hardwicke 
spoke in answer to the Duke of Argyle, who had gone over the whole 
of the foreign and domestic policy of the government, pointing out how 
the autocrat had engrossed all the power of the state into his own hands, 
and, acting tyrannically at home and feebly abroad, had sacrificed the 
constitution and the national honour to his own personal aggrandize- 
ment. We care little now about the treaty of Hanover, the treaty of 
Vienna, or the conduct of the Spanish war; and I will not even quote 
the Chancellor’s ingenious comparison between a campaign and “ an 
equity suit, in which the client takes great delight till the solicitor 
brings in his bill.” He seems to have--been most happy on the vague 
charge, much dwelt upon, of Sir Robert having made himself “sole 
minister.” This he likened to the old common-law high treason, called 
“‘accroachment,” or assumption of the royal authority, for which, till 
treasons were defined by the statute of Edward III., every great man 
obnoxious to the ruling faction was prosecuted and beheaded. The 
weakest part of his case was Sir Robert’s(practice which would not now be 
endured,) of cashiering military officers who were in Parliament—from 
generals down to cornets—if they voted against the government :* “I 
shall grant, my Lords, that it is a right maxim for the King not to 
notice a gentleman’s behaviour in Parliament with respect to the distri- 
bution of those favours which the Crown has to bestow. But even this 
maxim may admit of some exceptions. We know there is in this king- 
dom a party of professed Jacobites ; we know there is, likewise, a party 
of professed republicans. I do not say there are any of either of these 
parties now in Parliament; but if they should get into Parliament, if 
they should there pursue Jacobite or republican schemes, I believe it will 


* e.g. The Duke of Bolton and Lord Cobham deprived of their regiments, and 
Cornet Pitt dismissed from the Blues. 


LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE. 91 


not be said that the King ought to wink at such conduct, or that it would 
be any invasion of our constitution should he turn such officers out of his 
service. Iam far from applying this to any case that has lately hap- 
pened; nor do IJ think that his present Majesty ever dismissed any one 
from his service on account of his behaviour in Parliament, for he may 
have many other reasons for dismissing any officer, civil or military ; 
and if an officer, who otherwise deserves to be dismissed, happens to 
have a seat in Parliament, is he therefore dispunishable? But whatever 
reasons his Majesty may, at any time, have to make use of his pre- 
rogative to dismiss an officer from his service, I am convinced he will not 
allow any minister to advise him to make use of this prerogative for 
preventing a member’s declaring his sentiments freely about any mea- 
sure of government, provided he does it with that decency which is 
due to the Crown, and without any factious or seditious manner of 
expressing himself upon the subject under debate.” So the opponents 
of Sir Robert Walpole must be Jacobites or Republicans ;—and the 
Chancellor sanctions the doctrine of the Judges in the time of Charles 
]., that “‘ Parliament men are not to be questioned before the Council 
for what they say in Parliament, provided tt is said in a parliamentary 
way.” Sir Robert had a majority of 108 to 59,* and all the hope of 
upsetting him was from proceedings in the lower house after the dissolu- 
tion of Parliament, which was now impending. 

These discussions had a powerful effect to weaken the minister out 
a doors ; the elections went against him—particu- [Drc. 8, 1741.] 
arly in Scotland, where it used to be supposed, by 
their ‘* second sight,” they could see the shadow of a coming change ; 
and when the House of Commons met, the appointment of ** Chairman 
of Ways and Means” being carried against him, it was plainly seen 
that his official end was rapidly approaching. The old statesman made 
a gallant struggle; but the divisions on election petitions, then thought 
fair opportunities for a trial of party strength, continuing to go with the 
opposition,t he saw that he must soon be in a minority on all ques- 
tions, and his colleagues, and his own family, telling ; 
him that he could stand out no longer, he announced ita abate 
his determination to resign. 


* 12 Parl. Hist. 1047-1223. 

+ The last of these was the Chippenham case, in which there was a majority 
against him of 16—241 to 225.—Nothing shows so strikingly how these were con- 
sidered party questions, as the anecdote of Walpole’s demeanour while the tellers 
were ascertaining the numbers. ‘ Anticipating his fate, but bearing it with his 
usual fortitude and good-humour, he beckoned to the opposition member for Chip- 
penham, whom he had attempted to eject, to sit by him, spoke to him with great 
complacency, animadverted on the ingratitude of several individuals who were voting 
against the government, although he had conferred great favours upon them, and 
declared that he would never again sit in that house.”—Coze’s Walpole. 


92 REIGN OF GEORGE II, 


CHAPTER CXXXIII. 


CONTINUATION OF THE LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE TILL THE BREAKING 
OUT OF THE REBELLION OF 1745. 


~ 

Lorp HarpwickeE was for some time in a state of much anxiety. 
He dreaded that the termination of his official career had arrived, and 
he regretted that he had ever left the secure position of Chief Justice of 
the King’s Bench. Whatever Newcastle’s expectations might be, he 
certainly had not made terms with the opposition leaders, and the pro- 
bability was that he and those most intimately connected with him, must 
share Walpole’s fate. Strange to say, the victors had formed no plan 
to improve the victory for which they had so eagerly fought, and which 
they had for some time anticipated. Meanwhile, the nation was in a 
state of unexampled ferment. All classes had been taught to look for- 
ward to the fall of Walpole as the cure for the evils of which they com- 
plained, and as the certain means of gaining their own favourite mea- 
sure for reforming and governing the State. The counties and great 
cities sent instructions to their representatives all equally peremptory, 
but of very different import,—some insisting that the Septennial Act 
should be repealed, and that parliaments should be triennial or annual, 
—some that all placemen, as well as pensioners, should be excluded 
from sitting in the House of Commons,—some that all offices should be 
in the gift of the House of Commons,—more, that Walpole’s head 
should now answer for his misconduct,—but most of all, that the decay 
of trade and other national calamities might be immediately remedied 
by an act to forbid the exportation of wool! ‘The King and his private 
advisers, of whom the retiring minister, now Earl of Orford, was one, 
saw that the only chance of preserving the semblance of government or 
order in the country was to call in Pulteney, though personally so 
odious at Court that he had not been there for many years,* and to 
allow him, according to his own fancy, to form a new administration, 
of which it was of course supposed that he would himself be the head. 
The Duke of Newcastle and Lord Hardwicke were appointed to be the 
bearers to him of the keys of the royal cabinet. They opened the con- 
ference by saying, that ‘the King, convinced that Sir Robert Walpole 
was no longer supported by a majority of the House of Commons, had 
commanded them to offer the places held by that minister to Mr, Pul- 
teney, with the power of forming his own administration—on the sole 
condition that Sir Robert Walpole should not be prosecuted.’ Pulteney 
refused this condition, saying, that ‘even if he himself had been in- 
clined to agree to it, it might not be in his power to fulfil his engage- 


* His name had been struck out of the list of the Privy Council, and he had been 
denied the commission of the peace. 


LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE., 93 


ment, the heads of parties being like the heads of snakes, carried on by 
thetr tails.” 'The confusion increasing, the Chancellor and the Duke, 
at a subsequent meeting, declared that they were commissioned by the 
King to repeat the former offers, without urging the condition of not 
prosecuting the fallen minister, and his Majesty only requested that if 
any prosecution was commenced against Sir Robert, Mr. Pulteney, if 
he did not choose to oppose it, would at least do nothing to inflame it. 
Pulteney answered, that ‘“‘ he was not a man of blood, and that, in all 
his expressions of pursuing the minister to destruction, he had meant 
only the destruction of his power, but not of his person, though he was 
free to own that he thought some parliamentary censure at least ought 
to be inflicted for so many years of maladministration.” Then, to the 
infinite relief and delight of the messengers, he declared that “ although 
he demanded an alteration of men and measures, and that the strong 
forts of government should be delivered into the hands of his party, 
viz., a majority in the cabinet, the nominating of the boards of Trea- 
sury and Admiralty, with the restoration of the office of Secretary of 
State for Scotland,—he did not require an entire sweep of all who held 
place under the Crown, and that he would beg the two noble Lords, 
who had so courteously borne to him the gracious pleasure of the 
King, to retain their respective situations of Chancellor and Secretary 
of State.” To their utter amazement, he added: ‘ As the disposition 
of places is in my hands, I will accept none myself: I have so repeat- 
edly declared my resolution on that point, that I will not now contra- 
dict myself.” He then named the Earl of Wilmington First Lord of 
the Treasury, Sandys Chancellor of the Exchequer, Carteret Secretary 
of State, and the Marquis of Tweedale the new Secretary for Scotland ; 
while for himself he required an earldom, and a seat in the cabinet. 
On this footing the new administration was patched up. The Chan- 
cellor had the sagacity to see that it could not last long, but exulted in 
reflecting that he had not only escaped a great peril, but that among 
such colleagues, his personal influence must be greatly increased, and 
that future changes might be under his own control. Pulteney, be- 
come ‘ Earl of Bath,” soon discovered the error he had committed, and 
meeting in the House of Lords his former great rival, become * Earl of 
Orford,” exclaimed to him, * We are now the two most insignificant 
fellows in all England!” He made an effort to regain his position, but 
he found that his reputation and his power had perished irrecoverably. 

The first occasion of the Chancellor coming forward in public, as the 
organ of the new administration, was in opposing the bill to indem- 
nify witnesses who should give evidence upon the inquiry into the 
conduct of Sir Robert Walpole. ‘The proceedings against him in the 
House of Commons had been immediately checked by the objection of 
those who were examined, that ‘* they were not bound to criminate them- 
solves,” and a bill was introduced in very general and sweeping terms, 
enacting ‘ that all persons who, being examined before either House of 
Parliament, or any committee of either House respecting the charges 
against Robert Earl of Orford, should make any discoveries respecting 


94 REIGN OF GEORGE II. 


his misapplication of public money, or his improper disposition of offices 
or other misconduct of the said Earl, while a minister of the Crown, 
should be freed and discharged from all forfeitures, penalties, punish- 
ments, disabilities, and incapacities, to which they might be liable for or 
by reason or means of any matter or thing which, being examined as 
aforesaid, they should faithfully and truly discover, disclose, and make 
known.” The bill rapidly passed the House of Commons, and, although 
not only the members of the late administration, but those now in office 
who had so often cried out for ** Walpole’s head,” disliked it, no show of 
opposition could there be offered to it: but when it came before the 
Upper House, Lord Hardwicke resolutely attacked it in the finest speech 
which distinguished his parliamentary career. Having shown how it 
violated all the rules of evidence established for the protection of innocence 
and the danger of offering rewards for convictions, lately testified by 
a club of miscreants going about from assizes to assizes to invent crimes 
and to accuse the innocent for the sake of ‘ blood-money,” he pointed 
out the unprecedented atrocity of the measure in offering a reward for 
evidence to implicate a particular individual, without the proof or even 
assertion of any corpus delictt, In conclusion, he indignantly ex- 
claimed: ‘“ The promoters of this bill, like Pharaoh, require fitst to 
know ‘ what was their dream; and, secondly, what is the interpretation 
thereof.’ But, says a noble Lord,* ‘¢f we have not here a corpus delicti, 
we have what ts sufficient for the purpose, @ CORPUS SUSPICIONIs:’ a 
new expression anda new invention—the body of a shadow—and on this 
foundation he calls upon you to build his new superstructure of injus- 
tice! In my opinion, my lords, it is a bill calculated to make defence 
impossible, to deprive innocence of its guard, and to let loose oppression 
and injustice upon the world. It is a bill to dazzle the wicked with a 
prospect of security, and by impunity for one crime to incite them to the 
perpetration of another, It is a bill to confound the distinctions of right 
and wrong, to violate the essence of our constitution, to leave us without 
any rule for our actions, or any protection for our property, our lives 
or our good fame. So iniquitous is the law, my lords, that I would 
sooner suffer by it than vote for it.’t The bill was thrown out by a 


* The Earl of Chesterfield. 

+ This pithy conclusion, which we know to be genuine, from the MS. notes of 
Archbishop Secker taken at the moment, is thus expanded and spoiled by Dr. John- 
son :—‘‘So clearly do I now see the danger and injustice ofa Jaw like this, that 
although I do not imagine myself endued with any peculiar degree of heroism, I 
believe that if I were condemned to a choice so disagreeable, I should more willingly 
suffer by such a bill passed in my own case than consent to pass it in that of ano- 
ther.’ A comparison of the two reports, however, will clearly prove that Johnson 
had either been present at the debate, or had been furnished with very full and 
accurate notes of the speeches.—12 Parl. Hist. 637-38, 643-711. When Cave 
was examined at the bar of the House of Lords as to the Reports which appeared in 
the “Gentleman’s Magazine,” he certainly lied by representing that he had pre- 
pared them himself from his own notes,—with the exception of some speeches sent 
to him by members. He said “he got into the House and heard them, and made 
use of a black-lead pencil, and only took notes of some remarkable passages, and 
from his memory he put them together himself” Being asked “‘ Whether he printed 


LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE |. 95 


majority of 109 to 57. This decision, though made the subject of a 
violent protest in the lords, and some inflammatory resolutions of the 
Commons, was approved of by the public, who began to think that the 
reports of the secret Committees appointed to inquire into the miscon- 
duct of Sir Robert Walpole, disappointed all their expectations by dis- 
closing nothing, because there was little to be discovered, and who were 
now ready to point ‘all their indignation against those who, having 
pledged themselves to bring him to the block, were treading in his foot- 
steps. 

Lord Hardwicke’s importance (as he had expected) rose considerably 
in the new government. The Earl of Wilmington, the nominal chief, 
was a mere cipher. Lord Carteret had great influence, particularly in 
foreign affairs, but domestic measures were left chiefly to the Chancellor, 
and he was called upon to defend in debate the treaties that were entered 
into, and the arrangements which were made for the prosecution of the 
war and for the defence of the kingdom. The grand object of attack 
with the Jacobites, Tories, and disappointed Whigs, was the measure of 
taking 10,000 Hanoverian troops into British pay,—which was so un- 
popular that many who pretended to be well-wishers to the Protestant 
succession, joined in the cry of, “no Hanoverian King !” 

In the spring of 1743, this subject was brought forward in the House 
of Lords in a very offensive manner by Earl Stanhope (the son of the 
Minister), who moved an address to the King, praying ‘ that his Majesty, 
out of compassion to his English subjects, would exonerate them from 
those mercenaries who had been taken into pay without the consent of 
Parliament.” A furious debate was closed with a very able pleading 
by the Chancellor, which was much applauded at the time, although it 
has now nearly lost all its interest. One passage of it might have really 
called forth the exclamation,—‘** Well done, Colonel Yorke!” In an- 
swer to the observation that, under the present administration, the nation 
was reduced to poverty and had lost all its spirit, he replied :—* If our 
wealth is diminished, it is time to ruin the commerce of that nation 
which has driven us from the markets of the Continent,—by sweeping 
the seas of their ships and by blockading their ports. Our courage is 
depressed—not by any change in the nature of the inhabitants of this 
island, but by a long course of inglorious compliance with the demands, 
and of mean submission to the insults, of other nations. Let us put 
forth all the strength we can command, and we are secure. The com- 
plaint is, that we have the aid of a friendly state. My lords, we had 
auxiliaries in our pay at Blenheim and at Ramilies, and by the same 
means equal victories may still be won.” He then, as a lawyer, com- 
bated the objection that this arrangement with Hanover should have 


no speeches but such as were so put together by himself from his own notes ?”” he 
answered, ‘‘ Sometimes he has had speeches sent him by very eminent persons; that 
he has had speeches sent him by the members themselves.” Being asked “If he 
ever had any person whom he kept in pay to make speeches for him?” he said “ he 
never had.”—14 Parl. Hist. 60, This seems to have been an attempt to get at 
Jounson, whom he considered himself bound at all hazards to screen. 


96 REIGN OF GEORGE IL. 


been the subject of a treaty,—contending that such a mode of proceed- 
ing was impracticable :—* It is well known that no power in this king- 
dom can enter into a treaty with a foreign state except the King, and it 
is equally certain that with regard to Hanover the same right is limited 
to the Elector. This proposed treaty, my lords, is therefore, a treaty 
of the same person with himself—a treaty of which the two counter- 
parts are to receive their ratification from being signed by the same 
person, and @xchanged by being conveyed from his left hand to his 
right, and reciprocally from his right hand to his left.” He insisted 
that if Hanover had been governed by another Sovereign wholly uncon- 
nected with the present royal family of England, the arrangement would 
have been highly advantageous to English interests, and would have met 
with general applause. This speech made Lord Hardwicke ever after 
a special favourite with George II., who had a high opinion of his own 
skill in the art of war, and was now burning to eclipse the glories of 
Marlborough,—a wish which he soon after thought 
Eby pre ON he had actually accomplished at Dettingen,—al- 
though the French claimed the victory, and his undutiful nephew, Fre- 
derick of Prussia, represented him as “‘ standing all the day with his 
drawn sword in his hand, in the attitude of a fencing-master who is 
about to make a lunge in carte.” 

The Chancellor, amidst the plaudits bestowed upon his great Hano- 
verian speech, was this summer in some anxiety about ministerial 
arrangements. The Earl of Wilmington was dying, and Pulteney 
Karl of Bath, finding too late that he could not have influence without 
office and patronage, made a vigorous effort to succeed him. Such a 
proposal was highly alarming to Lord Hardwicke, for their cordiality 
had been fleeting, and their ancient enmity had lately burst out afresh. 
He therefore stirred up Henry Pelham, brother of his patron, the Duke 
of Newcastle, to claim the office, although this quiet judicious man, 
with characteristic timidity, shrunk from the dangerous eminence. He 
farther prevailed upon the fallen minister, who, in his retreat at Hough- 
ton, still had great influence over the royal mind, to back the applica- 

[Ave. 1743] mone On Wilmington’s death, the King, who was 

abroad, sent a despatch announcing his decision. in 
favour of Pelham. Lord Hardwicke was of course asked to continue 
Chancellor. The Duke of Newcastle then wrote to him, giving a hint, 
in a very amusing manner, about his over-caution: ‘* My brother has 
all the prudence, knowledge, experience, and good intention that I can 
wish or hope in man; but it will or may be difficult for us to stem alone 
that which, with your great weight, authority, and character, would 
not be twice mentioned, Besides, my brother and I may differ in opi- 
nion, in which case I am sure yours would determine both. There has 
been for many years a unity of thought and action between you and 
me ; and if [ have ever regretted anything, it has been (forgive me for 
saying it) too much caution in the execution, which I have sometimes 
observed has rather produced than avoided the mischief apprehended.” 

For many years afterwards Lord Hardwicke held the Great Seal as 


LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE, 97 


securely as his fee-simple estate at Wimple. All divisions in the Cabi- 
net were obviated by the dismissal of Carteret, become Earl of Gran- 
ville, the most accomplished, but the most fantastical politician of that 
age. The opposition was soon after weakened by the death of Lord 
Hervey and the Duke of Argyle, and by Lord Chesterfield’s acceptance 
of the viceroyalty of Ireland. Horace Walpole considers that from this 
time the Chancellor was Prime Minister, saying, “* When Yorke had 
left none but his friends in the Ministry, he was easily the most eminent 
for abilities,”’* 


CHAPTER CXXXIV. 


CONTINUATION OF THE LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE TILL THE DEATH 
OF FREDERICK PRINCE OF WALES. 


WE now approach the rebellion of 1745, with respect to which we 
shall find Lord Hardwicke acting an important part in the measures to 
suppress it,—in the trial of the rebel Lords,—and in the new laws 
framed to introduce order and subordination into the country in which 
it originated. On the 15th of February, 1744, he brought down a 
message from the King, stating that ‘ his Majesty had received un- 
doubted intelligence that the eldest son of the Pretender, having arrived 
in France, was making active preparations to invade the kingdom, in 
concert with disaffected persons here.” Both Houses joined in an ad- 
dress of thanks and assurance of support. This had been drawn by 
the Lord Chancellor, and concluded in the following eloquent and 
touching terms: ‘ Loyalty, duty, and affection to your Majesty ; con- 
cern for ourselves and our posterity ; every interest and every motive 
that can warm or engage the hearts of Britons and Protestants, call 
upon us on this important occasion to exert our utmost endeavours, that, 
by the blessing of God, your enemies may be put to confusion ; and we 
do all sincerely and earnestly assure your Majesty, that we will with 
zeal and unanimity take the most effectual measures to enable your 
Majesty to frustrate so desperate and insolent an attempt, and to secure 
and preserve your royal person and government, and the religion, laws, 
and liberties of these kingdoms.” 

However, a general supineness prevailed, and in about ten days 
afterwards a rebuke was administered to the Chancellor and his col- 
leagues by the Earl of Orford, who had never before opened his mouth 
in the House of Lords, By command of his Majesty, they had laid 
some papers before the House containing information on oath of the 
arrival of Prince Charles Edward at Dunkirk, and of the equipment of 
a fleet, and the assembling of an army there, for the invasion of Eng- 


* «Ten last Years of George II.,” 139. 
VOL. V. 7 


98 i REIGN OF GEORGE IL 


Jand. No motion being made except that ‘‘ the papers should lie on 
the table,” the Ex-premier said he little expected that anything would 
happen to make it necessary for him to offer his sentiments in that 
assembly, but that he felt he could not continue silent without a crime. 
‘‘ Little did I expect,” said he, ‘that the common forms of decency 
would have been violated by this august assembly. It is with the 
greatest surprise and emotion that [ see such a neglect of duty. When 
his Majestywhas communicated to you intelligence of the highest impor- 
tance, is he to receive no answer from the House? As such treatment, 
my Lords, has never been deserved by his Majesty, so it has never be- 
fore been practised. And sure, my Lords, if his hereditary council 
should select for such an instance of disrespect a time of distraction 
and confusion, a time when the greatest power in Europe is setting up 
a Pretender to his throne, and when only the winds have hindered 
an attempt to invade his dominions,— it may give our enemies oc- 
casion to imagine and report that we have lost all veneration for 
the person of our sovereign. It cannot be thought consistent with 
the wisdom of your Lordships to be employed in determining rights 
of private property, when so weighty a case as the title to the 
Crown ought to engross all your attention.* [Here he looked hard 
at the Chancellor.] At this instant the enemy may have set foot 
upon our coasts,—may be ravaging the country with fire and sword, 
and may be openly threatening us with extirpation or servitude. If 
this attempt succeed, we shall be ruled over by a viceroy of the 
French King, and your Lordships, who sit in this House with a dig- 
nity envied by every class of nobility in the world, will be no better 
than the slaves of a slave to an ambitious and arbitrary tyrant. Per- 
mit me to rouse you from this lethargy. Let the noble and learned Lord 
on the woolsack submit to the sacrifice of postponing for a little while the 
calling in of counsel to argue about costs, while we show so much regard 
for the great, the universal, the national interest, as to concert a 
proper form of address to his Majesty, that he may not appear labour- 
ing for our safety, while we neglect what is due to our Sovereign and 
to ourselves.” 


* On reference to the Journals it appears that one of the only three decrees of 
Lord Hardwicke ever appealed against was this day heard and affirmed. Countess 
of Warwick v. Earl of Cholmondeley. 

t+ As this is probably the last time I shall have to mention Walpole, whom I have 
had occasion to introduce from time to time ever since the impeachment of Lord 
Somers, I may be allowed tv observe, that after much unjust abuse heaped upon 
him there seems now to be a great disposition to bestow upon him unqualified 
praise. He was probably the most dexterous party-leader we have ever had,— 
equally skilled to win royal favour, to govern the House of Commons, and to in- 
fluence or be influenced by public opinion. He likewise well understood the 
material interests of the country, and, as far as was consistent with his own reten- 
tion of power, he was desirous of pursuing them. But that he might run no perso- 
nal risk, he would make no attempt to improve our institutions; he was regardless 
of distant dangers; he plunged into a war which he admitted to be unjust and im- 
politic,—and by his utter neglect of literature and literary men, in spite of the ex- 
ample set him by his immediate predecessors, Whig and Tory, he gave to official life 
in England that aristocratic feeling, and vulgar business-like tone which it has ever 
since retained, 


LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE, 99 


An apology being offered, on the ground that, after what had lately 
passed, no further declaration of their Lordships’ sentiments upon the 
present state of affairs was deemed necessary, the Chancellor moved an 
address “to give his Majesty the strongest assurances that this House 
will, at the hazard of their lives and fortunes, stand by and support his 
Majesty against France, and any other power whatsoever, that shall 
presume to assist or countenance the Pretender, or any of his descend- 
ants or adherents, or to invade or commit any hostilities against his 
Majesty’s kingdoms,”’—which was unanimously agreed to. The govern- 
ment, so little prepared for defence as not to have in all England an 
army of more than 7000 men, and only a few invalids in Scotland 
escaped present danger by the dreadful storm which dispersed the French 
squadron, and wrecked many of their transports, ‘‘ FLavir DEUS ET DIs- 
SIPANTUR.” But it was ascertained that while there was _,_ 

: : [1743—44.] 

in the country a powerful, zealous, and active party for 
the Pretender, great indifference was manifested by almost all other 
classes. ‘1 apprehend,” said old Horace Walpole, “ that the people 
may perhaps look on and cry, L%ght, dog, Fight, bear ! if they do 
no worse.” ; 

Lord Hardwicke, much alarmed by the aspect of affairs, had re- 
course to an expedient which I cannot think a very wise one ;—he 
resolved to render more stringent the laws against high treason—in- 
stead of trying, by reforms, to make the government more popular. 
Accordingly he caused a bill to be introduced in the House of Com- 
mons, to attaint the sons of the Pretender, if they should land, or 
attempt to land in Great Britain or Jreland; and when the bill came 
up to the Lords, he added clauses to make it high treason to cor- 
respond with the sons of the Pretender, and to postpone till their 
death the mitigation of the English law of treason, agreed to on the 
Union with Scotland, by which, after the death of the Pretender, 
corruption of blood in all cases of treason was to be done away 
with, so that innocent children might not be punished for the crime of 
their parents. 

These clauses were most strenuously opposed, particularly by John 
Duke of Bedford, who made a very fine speech against them, in which 
he alluded, with much pathos, to the fate of his grandfather, Lord 
Russell, and observed, that if it had not been for the circumstance of 
his great-grandfather stil] surviving at that time, all the property of his 
family would have been confiscated, and his name would have been 
extinct. Lord Hardwicke, in answer, delivered an elaborate speech, 
which, however, was a mere repetition of a very ingenious pamphlet 
lately written by his son, the Honourable Charles Yorke, entitled,. 
‘«* Considerations on the Law of Treason.”* His most difficult point 


* T have myself known several instances of a pamphlet being converted into a 
speech. One of the most remarkable of these was in a debate on the Catholic ques. 
tion, when there appearing a great coincidence of sentiment and language between 
a speech delivered by Sir John Copley and a pamphlet recently published by the: 
present Bishop of Exeter,—the old song was very happily quoted : 


100 REIGN OF GEORGE II, 


was to reconcile the postponement of the stipulated mitigation to the 
compact entered into with Scotland, whereby the English law of 
treason was admitted into that country, on an express condition which 
was to be now violated, and he was obliged to resort to such quibbles 
as, that ‘“‘it was not then foreseen that the Pretender would have 
sons ;”’ that ‘as he was in a green old age, and likely to live as long as 
them, the postponement was inconsiderable ;” and that, ‘if they had 
sons, a further postponement would be unnecessary, as, in a few 
years, the title of the reigning family would be universally recognised.””* 
The Chancellor had large majorities, but [ doubt whether he added to 
the security of the existing government by any of his enactments. 
The general feeling upon the subject was expressed by the oft re- 
peated exclamation, 


“See, Hardwicke’s quibbles voted into law!” 


Cameron, of Lochiel, cared little for acts of Parliament, when he 
said, ‘*] will share the fate of my Prince whatever it be, and so 
shall every man over whom nature or fortune has given me any 
power!” The dread of attainder had no influence on the movements 
of Charles Edward, and if he had been captured he must have been 
treated as a prisoner of war, for the voice of the whole world would 
have been raised against the meditated deed of executing him as a 
traitor. And the very fact of James I{I., being then a healthy man, 
little turned of fifty, showed that, by the proposed violation of the com- 
pact respecting the law of treason, odium was wantonly brought upon 
the reigning dynasty. 

During the session of Parliament, which began on the 24th of Novem- 
ber, 1744, and was closed on the 2d of May, 1745, there was the 
lull before the tempest; no business of any importance seems to 
have been transacted, and there has not been handed down to us 
the fragment of any debate in the House of Lords from the opening 
of it till the prorogation.t The King, as usual, then went abroad, 
and Lord Hardwicke, as a Lord Justice, was left at the head of the 
regency. 

In a most difficult situation was he placed. First came the news of 


“Good Sirs, this brown jug that now foams with mild ale, 
In which we now drink to sweet Nan of the vale, 
Was once Tosy Puttrorts.” 


* 13 Parl. Hist. 704-854. 


t “ What help from Jekyll’s opiates canst thou draw ? 
Or Hardwicke’s quibbles voted into law ?” 
Pope’s Fragment, 1740. 

1 It is a curious fact, that towards the middle of the last century, the public in. 
terest in parliamentary proceedings, instead of increasing, seems almost entirely to 
have died away ; for the prohibition against publishing debates would have had little 
effect if there had been any demand for them. Of the laborious and useful com- 
pilation, entitled ‘The Parliamentary History,” there is only one volume between 
1743 and 1747; one between 1747 and 1753; and one between 1753 and 1765. 
After Dr. Johnson ceased to report for the “Gentleman’s Magazine,” it contains 
few debates worth reading ; and the “London Magazine,” which rivalled it, falls off 
in the same proportion, 


LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE. 101 


the battle of Fontenoy, which not being connected [May 11, 1745.] 
with his administration of the government, and bring- 
ing no disgrace on the national character, though unfortunate, did not 
probably give him much concern: but in the course of a few weeks 
he was thrown into deep consternation by hearing of the landing of 
Prince Charles Edward in the Highlands of Scotland,—of his erect- 
ing the royal standard in Glenfinnan, with the motto TaNDEM TRI- 
umMpHANS,—of the gathering of the Highland clans around him,— 
of his march to Edinburgh, —of his enthusiastic reception in that 
metropolis,—of his festivals in Holyrood House,—of his victory over 
Cope at Prestonpans,—of the flight of the English troops to Ber- 
wick,—and of the preparations of the rebel army to cross the border. 
No blame was to be imputed to the Lords of the regency. A requi- 
sition was sent to the Dutch for the six thousand auxiliaries they 
were bound by treaty to furnish in case of invasion ; séveral regiments 
were recalled from Flanders ; the militia of the northern counties was 
called out; Marshal Wade was directed to collect at Newcastle all the 
troops of every sort that could be mustered ; and all suspected persons 
were taken up and confined in prison by virtue of a suspension of 
the Habeas Corpus act. But there was an entire apathy in the public 
mind, and the ‘ fight-dog—fight-bear” prophecy seemed about to be 
fulfilled. Thus writes. a colleague of Lord Hardwicke well affected 
to the government, and not of a desponding turn of mind. ‘ Eng- 
land, Wade says, and [ believe, is for the first comer; and if you can 
tell whether the six thousand Dutch, and ten battalions of English, or 
five thousand French or Spaniards will be here first, you know our 
fate.’* ‘The French are not come, God be thanked! But had five 
thousand landed in any part of this island a week ago, I verily believe 
the entire conquest of it would not have cost them a battle.”’t 

The King returned in a hurry from Hanover, on the 31st of August, 
but although thereby Lord Hardwicke’s personal responsibility was re- 
lieved, his anxiety was rather increased ; for his Majesty could not be 
made aware of his danger, and it was considered contrary to court 
etiquette to say that the Stuarts had any adherents. ‘ Lord Granville 
and his faction,” says Horace Walpole, “ persist in persuading the King 
that it is an affair of no consequence; and for the Duke of Newcastle, 
he is glad when the rebels make any progress, in order to confute 
Lord Granville’s assertions. His Majesty uses his ministers as ill as 
possible, and discourages everybody that would risk their lives and 
fortunes with him.”{ Lord Hardwicke, at the request of the cabinet, 
and in the name of the whole of them, presented a strong remonstrance 
to his Majesty on his want of confidence in his servants, but it was 
heard with silence and disgust. Their object now was, by language of 
kindness, and by measures of conciliation, to rouse some spirit in de- 
fence of the present establishment, and to try to impress upon the 
public mind a sense of the benefits obtained, and the evils avoided, 


* Henry Fox to Sir C. H. Williams. t Same to same, 
t To Sir H, Mann, 20th September, 1745. 


102 REIGN OF GEORGE II. 


by calling in the family which the nation, in their folly, appeared 
desirous of seeing ejected. 

Parliament met on the 18th of October, when the King was persuaded 
to deliver a well-conceived speech, written by the Chancellor, containing 
the following stirring appeal :—** I have throughout the whole course of 
my reign made the laws of the land the rule of my government, and 
the preservation of the constitution in church and state, and the rights 
of my peopl’, the main end and aim of all my actions : it is, therefore, 
the more astonishing that any of my Protestant subjects who have 
known and enjoyed the benefits resulting from thence, and have heard of 
the imminent dangers these kingdoms were wonderfully delivered from 
by the happy Revolution, should, by any artsand management, be deluded 
into measures that must at once destroy their religion and liberties, in- 
troduce Popery and arbitrary power, and subject them to a foreign 
yoke. Jam confident you will act like men who consider that every- 
. thing dear and valuable to them is attacked, and I question not, but, by 
the blessing of God, we shall in a short time see this rebellion end, not 
only in restoring the tranquillity of my government, but in procuring 
greater strength to that excellent constitution which it was designed to 
subvert. ‘The maxims of this constitution shall ever be the rules of my 
conduct. The interest of me and my people is always the same, and 
inseparable. In this common interest let us unite, and all those who 
shall heartily and vigorously exert themselves in this just and national 
cause may always depend upon my protection and favour.”* His 
Majesty’s gracious speech was generally circulated throughout the na- 
tion, while lower, and perhaps more effectual arts were used to rouse the 
people to the belief that they had an interest in the quarrel. ‘Thus the 
butchers were specially apostrophized—on the ground that Papists ab- 
stain from eating meat in Lent,—and hand-bills were hawked through 
the streets, representing that the tartaned Highlanders not only violated 
virgins, but ate young children for supper. A little reflection only was 
wanting to convince all reasoning men that they ought to stand by the 
present establishment. Setting aside the doctrine of indefeasible here- 
ditary right, which had now few adherents in England, there was, un- 
questionably, a better prospect of constitutional and wise government 
under the House of Hanover, than under the recalled Stuarts. The 
two Georges, though not destitute of some respectable qualities, certainly 
were not very interesting or amiable characters ; their utter contempt 
for literature and the arts placed them disagreeably in contrast with the 


* 13 Parl. Hist. 1311. In the Earl of Marchmont’s Diary, under date October 7> 
1745, it is said that “the Chancellor, starting as from a lethargy, remarked that he 
had thought lightly of the Highlands, but now saw they made a third of the island 
in the map.” It is very possible that he might have made this geographical obser- 
vation ; but there is no pretence for saying that he had been blind to the danger 
which now threatened the government. On the contrary, he had long observed and 
lamented the growing activity of the Jacobites, and the growing indifference of the 
rest of the nation; and from the landing of Prince Charles was an alarmist as well 
as Newcastle, of whom the characteristic story was invented, that “for a whole day 
he shut himself up, considering how he might best make terms with the Pretender.” 


LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE, 103 


two Charles’s,* and some ground existed for the charge that substantial 
British interests had been sacrificed to the object of procuring petty ad- 
ditions to the Electorate. But upon the whole, the change of dynasty 
had answered well. During the half century which had elapsed since 
the expulsion of James IT.,—notwithstanding the blind rage of contend- 
ing factions, there had been, with slight interruptions, profound tran- 
quillity in the country ; the nation had made rapid and steady progress 
in wealth and power, and Britons had enjoyed civil and religious liberty, 
to a degree hitherto unknown in the world. What could be expected 
from a Restoration, pronounced by Mr. Fox to be “the worst of re- 
volutions,” and which, in this instance, must have been fatal to our free 
constitution, from the arbitary principles on which it was to be defended ! 
The objection was most forcible, that the family claiming the throne 
were of a different religion from the great majority of the people, and 
looking to their personal qualities, it could not be overlooked that the 
Old Pretender, calling himself James IIL, was a narrow-minded bigot, 
while Prince Charles, notwithstanding his romantic adventures, and the 
attempts to exalt him into a hero, being, in reality, a very ill-educated 
and very silly young man, had shown a mixture of rashness and obsti- 
nacy which, combined with his hereditary notions of prerogative, ren- 
dered him wholly unfit to rule over a free people. 

The King himself became apprehensive, when news arrived of the 
rebels having crossed the border—having captured Carlisle—having 
been kindly welcomed at Manchester—and having advanced to Derby, 
within little more than 100 miles of the Capital. Lord Hardwicke and 
the Duke of Neweastle were for the time in favour with him, and he 
heartily co-operated with them in marching the Guards to Finchley,t 
and taking the most vigorous measures for the public safety. But when 
the danger seemed to have passed away by Prince Charles’ retreat,{ his 
disaster at Clifton, and the recapture of Carlisle by the Duke of Cum. 
berland, his Majesty’s dislike of the Duke of Newcastle again broke 
out in the saying, that it was hard he should have for his minister a 


* T have often been at a loss to understand how all the good songs, all the good 
tunes, (with the exception of “the Campbells are coming,”) all the poetry, and all 
the wit, were on the side of the Jacobites. Is it to be accounted for by the appre- 
hension, that the heads of the House of Brunswick would not endure to have their 
cause supported by the effusions of genius and taste ? 

+ See Hogarth. 

t The most’recent and the most able historian of those times, says, that “had 
Charles marched onwards from Derby, he would have gained the British throne,” 
(3 Lord Mahon, 415;) but without a rising in his favour in England, his little army 
must have been extinguished at Finchley; the English Jacobites, who had been 
lavish of promises, faltered when it came to the push; and, after all, their numbers 
were not sufficient to have effected anything without the general assistance of the 
squires and the clergy, who again began to have the same fear for the Protestant 
religion, by which they were actuated in 1688, The general apathy arose a good 
deal from too great a contempt of the danger. If Charles had advanced to take 
London, his attempt would have more resembled Louis Bonaparte’s attack on 
Boulogne than Napoleon’s triumphal entrance into Paris from Elba. 


a 


104 REIGN OF GEORGE II, 


F 4G.7 0” hardly fit to bea Chamberlain in a@ peity German 
Leb haees court, and he formed a new ministry under Lord Gran- 
ville, which lasted exactly forty-eight hours, It was said when the crisis 
was over, that Lord Hardwicke was ready to have resigned with his 
colleagues ; but he warily abstained from doing so, recollecting that it is 
easy for a minister to go out, and often very difficult to get back again, 

A little temporary dismay, with mutual recriminations, arose from the 
[Aprit 29,2746,] pee. Ok the. fight protons but exulialiad and 

complacency were diffused by the victory of Cullo- 
den. Now Lord Hardwicke had the satisfaction of reading an address 
of congratulation unanimously voted by the Lords, in which he had dex- 
terously introduced the following sentence, most soothing to the royal 
ear :—‘‘ It is with the greatest pleasure and admiration we behold in 
how eminent a manner this signal victory has been owing to the valour 
and conduct of his Royal Highness the Duke; if anything could add 
to our joy on such an event it is to see a prince of your Majesty’s blood, 
formed by your example, and imitating your virtues, the glorious in- 
strument of it ; and happy should we be in any opportunity of testifying 
the high sense we have of such illustrious merit.”* 

Next followed the painful but necessary task of trying the rebel 
lords. ‘The victory of Culloden was followed by wanton severities on 
the vulgar, which justly gave its hero an appellation immortalised by 
Byron ; but for the good order of society, the leaders of an attempt to 
subvert an established government must make it atythe peril of their 
own lives, and they are bound to consider not only the justice of their 
cause, but the probabilities of success or failure. Against the Earls of 

Kilmarnock and Cromarty, and Lord Balmerino, bills of 
[a. D., 1746.] - dj rps raat 
indictment were found by a grand jury for the part they 
had taken in the siege of Carlisle; and these being removed by certio- 
rari before the House of Lords, the trials were or- 
ea Waa Mia dered to take place in Westminster Hall. Lord 
Hardwicke was appointed Lord High Steward. 

On this occasion he is bitterly censured by Horace Walpole, who 
says, ‘though a most comely personage with a fine voice, his 
behaviour was mean, curiously searching for occasion to bow to the 
prime minister, that is no peer ; and not even ready at the ceremonial, 
To the prisoners he was peevish; and instead of keeping up to the 
humane dignity of the law of England, whose character it is to point 
out favour to the criminal, he crossed them, and almost scolded at any 
offer they made towards defence.”t .... . . ‘* He lost the character 


* 13 Parl. Hist. 1405. 

t Letter to Sir H. Mann.—He afterwards goes on to tell the following amusing 
anecdote of Lord Mansfield, which is a gross misrepresentation, as Mr. Solicitor’s 
conduct to all the prisoner’s during the trial was most courteous. ‘ While the 
Lords were withdrawn, the Solicitor-General Murray, (brother of the Pretender’s 
minister,) officiously and insolently went up to Lord Balmerino, and asked him how 
he could give the Lords so much trouble. Balmerino asked the bystanders who this 
person was? and being told, he said, “Oh, Mr. Murray, I am extremely glad to see 


you; I have been with several of your relations; the good lady, your mother, was 
of great use to us at Perth.” 


LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE. 105 


for humanity he had before tried to establish, when he sat as Lord 
High Steward at the trials of the Scotch Lords, the meanness of his 
birth breaking out in insolent acrimony.”* This censure is greatly 
overcharged, but I cannot defend the propriety and good taste of all 
his Grace’s observations to the noble prisoners, and he forgot that 
although their attempt not having prospered, it was called treason, and 
the law required that they should be sentenced to death ; they were not 
guilty of any moral offence, and that if they had succeeded in placing 
Charles Edward on the throne of his grandfather, they would have 
been celebrated for their loyalty in all future ages. 

When they had been marched to the bar, the gentleman jailer stand- 
ing by their side, holding the axe the edge still turned from them, he 
addressed a preliminary speech to them, which thus began :—‘ William, 
Earl of Kilmarnock, George, Earl of Cromarty, Arthur, Lord Balmerino, 
your Lordships are brought before the most august judicature in this 
kingdom, in order to receive your several trials upon different charges 
of high treason, As the crimes whereof you stand accused are of the 
most heinous nature, so the accusations against you are grounded on 
no slight foundations, But though your charge is thus weighty and 
solemn, it is but a charge, and open to all such defences as the circum- 
stances of your several cases and the rules of law and justice will 
admit. The law is the solid basis and support of the King’s throne : 
it is the great bulwark of the property, the liberty, and life of every 
subject, and it is the security of the privileges and honours of the 
Peerage. By this measure, which is uniform and equal to every mem- 
ber of the community, your actious which are now called in question 
are this day to be examined and judged. If your lordships are innocent, 
this will be one ground of a reasonable confidence in your present 
unhappy circumstances. But to this consideration your own thoughts 
cannot fail to add another; I mean that the rules of this law are to be 
expounded and disclosed to you by this illustrious assembly, the whole 
body of the Peers of Great Britain, in whose noble and discerning minds 
nothing can have weight but evidence and justice. Guilt alone can 
endanger you, and innocence alone can acquit you.” He had sarcasti- 
cally told them of their felicity in being tried under the law made to 
regulate the trial of high treason since the Revolution. ‘ However 
injuriously that Revolution has been traduced,” said he,—‘* whatever 
attempts have been made to subvert this happy establishment founded 
upon it, your Lordships will now have the benefit of that law in its full 
extent.” 

Lords Kilmarnock and Cromarty pleaded guzty, but Lord Balmerino 
pleaded not gutlty—only, however, to show the stoutness of his heart 
and that he might glory in what he had done, for he had been taken 
with arms in his hands, and he attempted no legal defence beyond 
objecting that he was improperly described in the indictment as being 
* late of Carlisle,” and that on the particular day laid in the indictment 


* Memoirs of ten last years of George II. 


106 REIGN OF GEORGE II. ~ 


on which he was charged with assaulting that city, he was more than 
twenty miles off; but the Lord High Steward told him that his de- 
scription was an immaterial form, and that according to English pro- 
cedure the overt act of treason might be alleged on one day, and 
proved on another.* Ofcourse he was unanimously found guilty,—a 
verdict which he heard undismayed, being resolved on the scaffold, in 
response to the prayer—‘ God bless King George,” to say ‘¢ God bless 
King James !2 

The Lord High Steward now proceeded to pronounce sentence on all 
the three: “ By this conviction it is now finally determined that your 
Lordships are guilty of that crime which not only the laws of Great 
Britain but of all other countries, for the wisest reasons, adjudge to be 
the highest. As it gives the deepest concern to every one of my Lords, 
your peers, to find persons of your birth and quality stained with so 
foul an offence, so it must give them some satisfaction that all of you, 
in effect, have confessed it. Charity makes one hope that this is an 
indication of some disposition to that repentance which your guilt so 
loudly calls for. To attempt to aggravate crimes of so deep a dye, and 
in themselves so incapable of aggravation, against persons in your 
unhappy circumstances, would be a vain as well as a most disagreeable 
task. And yet the duty of that place in which I have the honour to sit 
requires that I should offer some things to your consideration, to explain 
more fully the necessity of that justice which is this day to be admini- 
stered, and to awaken in your minds a due sense of your own con- 
dition.” Having then, at most unjustifiable length, given a partial view of 
the campaign, and of the motives and objects of the opposite sides, he thus 
concludes: ‘If from any unforeseen accidents, not uncommon in mili- 
tary operations, delusive hopes were for some time kept alive, it seems 
to have been judicially designed by Providence to render the more signal 
that vengeance which was reserved for them at the battle of Culloden. 
How much was owing, on that memorable day, to the bravery and 
discipline of his Majesty’s troops, to the animating example, the intrepid 
valour, and the wise conduct of a Prince descended from him who is so 
deeply engraven on the heart of every member of this great assembly, 
that I could only repeat what their own grateful minds have already 
suggested to themselves, and represented to the throne. Then was 
experienced how much that courage, which virtue, true loyalty, and the 
love of our country inspire, is superior to the rashness and false fire of 
rebellion, accompanied by the terrors of guilt. I will add no more. It 
has been his Majesty’s justice to bring your Lordships to a legal trial ; 


* The last Duke of Queensbury, (old Q.,) whom I knew on my first coming to 
London, used to complain of the shameful manner in which he had once been used 
by losing a great cause, simply for not doing what those who required it knew to be 
impossible. “When the trial was nearly over,” said he, “ proclamation was made 
that I, who was the plaintiff, should come forth; and because I did not come forth, 
{ was nonsuited and cast, although Judge, jury, and counsel, all were well aware 
that I was not then attending the Kingston Assizes, but was shooting grouse in the 
Highlands of Scotland.” 

t From him Walter Scott has taken the exit of Fergus MaclIvor. 


LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE. 107 


and it has been his wisdom to show that, as a small part of his national 
forces was sufficient to subdue the rebel army in the field, so the ordi- 
nary course of his laws is strong enough to bring even their chiefs to 
justice, What remains for me is a very painful, though a necessary, 
part. It is to pronounce that sentence which the law has appointed 
for crimes of this magnitude; a sentence full of horror ! such as the 
wisdom of our ancestors has ordained as one guard about the sacred 
person of the King, and as a fence about this excellent constitution, to 
be a terror to evil doers, and a security to them that do well. The 
judgment of the law is, and this High Court doth award, ” and so 
he went through the drawing, hanging, cutting down alive, burning 
their bowels before their faces, and the other particulars which he had 
eulogised as necessary for the protection of the King and constitution.* 
Cromarty was pardoned, out of compassion to his wife. The other two 
were beheaded, the rest of their sentence being remitted. 

Without imputing blame in this instance to the government, their 
tragical end excited much commiseration :— 





“ Pitied by gentle minds, Kilmarnock died, 
The brave, Balmerino, were on thy side.” 


The next victim, notwithstanding the courage he displayed, fell un- 
lamented :— 
“ But Lovat’s fate indifferently we view, 

True to no King, to no religion true ; 

No Tory pities, thinking what he was, 

No Whig compassions, for he left-the cause. 

The brave regret not, for he was not brave, 

The-honest mourn not, knowing him a knave.” 
As he had committed no overt act of treason in England, to bring his 
case before the House of Lords, it was necessary to (Marcu, 1747.] 
proceed against him by impeachment. Articles being 
presented at the bar, the Chancellor was again appointed Lord High 
Steward, and the trial took place in Westminster Hall. 

Lord Hardwicke on this occasion cannot be accused of any departure 
from the rules of law or justice ; but he was too solicitous to praise the 
existing government, and he betrayed, under assumed moderation of 
tone, great internal exultation at finding such a victim in his power. 
All parties knowing that there was the certainty of a conviction on 
the clearest evidence, in his preliminary address to the prisoner when 
placed at the bar, he said, “* The weight of this accusation, the solemn 
manner of exhibiting and prosecuting it, and the awfulness of this 
supreme judicature, the most illustrious in the world, are circumstances 
that may naturally strike your mind with anxious and alarming appre- 
hensions. Reasonable and well-grounded must those apprehensions be 
if they proceed from that greatest of all terrors, a consciousness of guilt. 
But if your Lordship is innocent, if you have really preserved yourself 
untainted with the heinous crimes laid to your charge, these very 


* 18 St. Tr, 442—530. 


108 REIGN OF GEORGE II. 


awful circumstances, when duly considered, ought to have a contrary 
effect, and to afford you support and consolation.” —After the verdict of 
guilty came a speech of culpable length and virulence ; for the punish- 
ment provided by the law in cases of high treason did not include 
torturing and mangling while still alive by the Judge as well as by the 
hangman, After describing how Lord Lovat had forced out his clan to 
fight for the Pretender, he thus introduced a dissertation on clanship, 
much fitter for a debate in the House when sitting as a legislative 
assembly: ‘* Permit me to stop here a little and lament the condition of 
part of this united kingdom ; happily united in interests, both civil and 
religious ; happily united under the same gracious monarch and the 
same public policy. Yet the common people, in some of the remote 
northern counties, are kept in a state of bondage to certain of their 
fellow-subjects, who, contrary to all law and every true principle of 
government, have erected themselves into petty tyrants over them, and 
arrogate to themselves the right of compelling them into rebellion 
against their lawful sovereign, under tne peril of fire and sword. 
Astonishing it is that such a remain of barbarism should have subsisted 
so long in any quarter of this civilized well-governed island. But let it 
be accounted one good fruit of this inquiry, that it has been so clearly 
made manifest. Sucha knowledge of the disease points out the remedy. 
This usurped power was audaciously made use of over your clan. It 
is true your Lordship’s activity in exercising it rose and fell in propor- 
tion to the appearance of the good or bad success of the Pretender’s 
cause; but after the advantage gained by the rebels at Preston Pans, 
which you vainly called a victory not to be paralleled in history, you 
thought it right to throw off the mask, and openly ‘to espouse a party 
which you then hoped might be espoused with impunity.” After a 
history of the rebellion, and many other topics, political, economical, 
military, and religious, at last came the sentence, which, though fright- 
ful, it must have been a relief to hear. Lovat died bravely, exclaiming 
“* Dulce et decorum est pro patrié mort ,;” but his treachery and 
cruelty were so notorious, that a savage shout of exultation was raised 
when he laid his head on the block. 

About this time another execution took place, which was universally 
condemned, and which | think reflects great disgrace upon Lord Hard- 
wicke. Asthe legal adviser of the Crown, he was chiefly answerable 
for it, although he did not ostensibly take any part in the proceeding. 
Charles Radcliffe, when quite a boy, had been engaged in the rebellion 
of 1715, and being attainted had escaped from Newgate. His elder 
brother, the Earl of Derwentwater, had then been beheaded, all the 
possessions of his family had been confiscated, their blood had been 
corrupted, he had lost all the rights of citizenship in his native land, 
and he had chosen another country in which, for thirty years, he had 
lived quietly and respectably. During the insurrection in Scotland, 
having been captured on board a French vessel bound for that country, 
it was resolved that he should be arraigned on his original sentence, 
which had slumbered so. long. The only trial now conceded to him 


LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE. 109 


was confined to his identity, and although there was no doubt of the 
fact, 1 do not think that it was satisfactorily established by legal evi- 
dence.* For such a course there was no precedent, except in the case 
of Sir Walter Raleigh, which had brought shame upon the reign of 
James I. The constancy of this unfortunate gentleman to his cause, 
and the calmness of his demeanour, powerfully excited the public 
sympathy in his favour: 
“Radcliffe, unhappy in his crimes of youth, 

Steady in what he still mistook for truth; 

Beheld his death, so decently unmoved, 

The soft lamented, and the idee approved,” 

The general opinion was and is, that there was at this time greater 
and less necessary severity than on the suppression of the rebellion of 
1715,t} and although the blame of it is laid upon the Duke of Cumber- 
land, who personally ordered the military executions which rendered 
his name so odious in Scotland, Lord Hardwicke ought to be held re- 
sponsible for what was done judicially in England. 

However, I am glad to be able again to praise him, in stating his 
admirable measure for abolishing heritable jurisdictions in Scotland, by 
which that country was more benefited than by any legislative measure 
ever passed. The feudal system had been there pushed to more oppres- 
sive lengths than in any part of Europe. The relation of lord and 
vassal, which elsewhere is consistent with personal and civil freedom, 
among the Caledonians approached that of master and slave. Almost 
every manor or barony was a little independent state, subject to the 
most arbitrary laws—or rather to no law except the will of the little 
tyrant called the dazed or chief. He had the power of life and death 
under a grant of “fossa et furca,” or ‘pit and gallows,” and for lack 
of evidence to convict a prisoner of theft, it was enough to urge that 
“the young laird had not yet seen a man hanged.” In the larger 
jurisdictions the forms of justice were more regularly observed, but it 
sometimes happened that the judge was a Highland chieftain, that the 
prosecutor and the jury were all of the same name and blood, and that 
the accused was of a rival clan at mortal enmity with them—from 
mutual depredations and acts of vengeance reciprocally inflicted for 
many generations.) ‘The interference of the King’s regular Courts was 


* 18 St. Tr. 430-442. t Hall. Const. Hist. iii, 312. 

{ The subsequent execution of Dr. Alexander Cameron in 1753, I regard as a 
wanton atrocity. He was a man of literature and science, who, having studied 
surgery, had accompanied his brother, the famous Lochiel, into the field in 1745, 
that he might take care of him when wounded; and had escaped with Prince 
Charles after the battle of Culloden. His name was included in the act of attainder, 
and he was appointed surgeon to a regiment in the French service. Some years 
after, in a time of profound tranquillity, when all real danger of Jacobitism had 
passed away, he visited his native country to arrange his private affairs; and being 
betrayed, he was sent to London, arraigned on the act of attainder, and without trial, 
executed as a traitor at Tyburn; displaying the highest qualities of a philosopher 
and a Christian. Although Lord Hardwicke’s name is not mentioned in this affair, 
he must have been consulted about it; and he must have been present in council 
when the death-warrant was signed.—See 19 St. Tr. 733-746. 

§ I am sorry to say, that in one of the most noted instances of this sort, the Judge 


110. REIGN OF GEORGE IL. 


prohibited, and the only control that could be exercised over these 
judicial enormities was by the Scottish Privy Council, the most cruel, 
remorseless, and arbitrary tribunal ever established in any country,— 
compared to which the English Star Chamber was mild, compassionate 
and regardful of law and justice. One striking consequence of the 
system was, that the mass of the population were almost unconscious of 
the general government of the country, and looked only to the will of 
the superior % whose rule they were subjected, and under his banner 
they were equally ready to fight for King James or King George. 
This consideration led to the abolition of hereditary jurisdictions in 
Scotland, without much regard being paid to the private oppression 
which they generated. The evils of the system had been long lamented, 
but from the whole aristocracy being interested in perpetuating them in 
a country where there was no middle class and the people had no voice, 
a remedy for them was considered hopeless. James [. in his Bastticon 
Doron, addressed to Prince Henry, had observed :—* Sed nihil est, 
quod legum usum magis impediat, quam juris regalis hereditariz apud 
quosdam nobiles potestas; vera totius regni calamitas. Nihil mihi in 
presentia consilii hic succurrit, nisi ut severissimam a singulis exigas 
officii rationem, et quantum leges permiserint, cessantium castiges 
ignaviam, Et si quis potestatem hanc suo vitio amiserit, nemini post 
illum heereditario jure eam concesseris. Vertim ad laudabilem Anglize 
consuetudinem omnia hee paulatim aptare studebis.”* At the time of 
the Union in the reign of Queen Anne, there was an express stipulation 
without which that measure could not have been carried.—‘ That all 
heritable offices, superiorities, heritable jurisdictions, and offices for life, 
should be reserved to the owners thereof as rights of property in the 
same manner as they were then enjoyed by the laws of Scotland.” 
But Lord Hardwicke, like a true statesman, seeing that it was for the 
manifest advantage of Scotland, and of the whole 
Leupaaitl a6, | empire, that they should be abolished, seized the 
favourable opportunity of the suppression of the rebellion to effect this 
great reform. Immediately after the trial of Lords Kilmarnock, 
Cromarty, and Balmerino, he opened the subject in the House of Peers, 
and procured an order to be made on the Lords of Session to prepare 
the draught of ‘a bill for remedying the inconveniences arising from 
heritable jurisdiction in Scotland, and for making more effectual pro- 
vision for the regular administration of justice throughout that part of 
the United Kingdom by the King’s courts ahd judges there,” and that 
they should inquire into and make a report upon the nature and extent 
of those jurisdictions. The Scotch Judges, at that time all landed pro- 
prietors, who for little emolument contentedly filled the judicial office in 
consideration of the power and influence it conferred, resolved to thwart 
the English Chancellor in this salutary measure. They presented a 
report in which, on frivolous excuses, such as that some records were 


was the Duke of Argyle, the jury were all Campbells, and a poor Macdonald was 
tried for the murder of a Campbell. 
* Opera Jacobi Regis, p. 150. t Art. 19. 


LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE. lil 


damaged, and others were locked up with the Scottish regalia, they 
pretended that they could not prepare the draught of the required bill, 
nor give an accurate account of the nature and extent of the heritable 
jurisdictions ; and they remonstrated against the abolition of these 
jurisdictions as a measure contrary to the articles of Union, and wholly 
impracticable.* . 

Lord Hardwicke, nothing daunted, caused a bill to meet his object to 
be prepared under his own superintendence in London, 
vind this he introduced at the commencement of the Se SE 
following session in a most lucid and argumentative speech, of which 
we have an authentic report edited by himself. In this he animadverts 
with decency, but with the most cutting severity, on the conduct of the 
Scotch Judges, saying, amongst other things equally bitter, ‘‘ the inter- 
ference of the legislature is now proved to be indispensable, for after the 
discovery made by the Lords of Session to all the world, that there is 
no record by which the nature and extent of these heritable jurisdictions 
can be ascertained, they may be claimed and stretched by all who think 
fit, and the poor people who are oppressed are told by those to whom 
they might fly for refuge that there is no redress for oppression in its 
worst form.” His chief difficulty was to combat the argument arising 
from the treaty of Union. After some rather sophistical criticisms upon 
the language of the different articles, he assumes a manly tone, and 
boldly contends that the Parliament of the United Kingdom had in it all 
the powers which belonged to the Parliament of Scotland, and could now 
legislate on the subject as that parliament might have done,—insisting, 
that if the measure was clearly required by existing circumstances, and 
must be for the general good of Scotland, it ought to be adopted were it 
forbidden by the articles of Union in terms the most. express and pe- 
remptory. He showed that an attempt to fetter the supreme legislative 
power in any state is a contradiction in terms. ‘In all countries,” he 
said, “* the legislative power must, to a general intent, be absolute ; and 
therefore, upon treaties of this nature, strict and rigid’ constructions 
ought not to be made, and may prove dangerous. If they should too 
easily be given way to, incorporating Unions would become imprac- 
ticable or mischievous. Out of policy, I presume, but not very 


* It was soon after this that a Lord of Session spoke so contemptuously of Crom- 
well’s Judges, who he could not deny had administered justice impartially and satis- 
factorily, but whom he deprived of all merit from being free of local and party con- 
nexions, saying, “ No thanks to them, KITHLEss Loons !” 

+ This, however, is perhaps, by a fallacy, begging the question. There may be 
a legislature with limited powers, like the American Congress,—and it is possible 
that after an incorporating union the power of the united legislature may be made 
to be limited by the conditions of the treaty of union declaring that any law to in- 
fringe these conditions is void, and by erecting a tribunal like the Supreme Court of 
the United States to decide whether any law is contrary to these conditions—or, in 
a rougher manner, by providing that an infraction of these conditions shall work a 
dissolution of the union. However, I entertain no doubt that by the just construc- 
tion of the treaty of Union with Scotland, and of the treaty of Union with Ireland, 
the united legislature was to be vested with supreme and absolute power over the 
whole empire. The fact that a proposed law repeals or alters any article of the 


‘ 


112 REIGN OF GEORGE II. 


sincerely, he declared that he was not moved to bring forward this 
measure by the rebellion, or by the supposed disaffection of Scotland, 
or by a belief that the present possessors of these heritable jurisdictions 
were not fit to be intrusted with such powers, there being before his 
eyes Scottish chiefs of distinguished loyalty, as well as high birth, 
worthy to be trusted with any powers which it is proper for the crown 
to confer upon a subject. ‘ My Lords,” said he, ‘* my true reasons are 
drawn from ‘Known and allowed maxims of policy. | think that the 
parcelling out in this manner the power of jurisdiction originally lodyed 
in the Crown, was an erroneous and a dangerous model of government. 
I look upon the administration of justice as the principal and essential 
part of all government, The people know and judge of it by little else. 
The effects of this are felt every day by the meanest in the business 
and affairs of common life. Statesmen look abroad into foreign 
countries, and consider our remote interests and connexions with other 
nations. But of what utility are those views, however great and just, 
unless they be referred back to our domestic peace and good order! 
The chief object of the social compact is to secure to us the regular 
course of law and justice. When the King, therefore, grants away 
jurisdiction, he parts with so much of his government; it is giving away 
so many jewels of his crown. It is certainly putting so much of the 
protection of his people into other hands; and this tends directly to 
dissolve the bond of allegiance and affection between King and people ; 
whilst the subjects do not see the King either in the benefits they enjoy 
or the punishments they undergo. Hence arises a dangerous and un- 
constitutional dependence. ‘The people will follow those who have the 
power to help or to hurt them ; and this dependence will operate most 
strongly in the uncivilized part of any country remote from the seat of 
government, The ill effects of it in Scotland were felt long since, and 
will continue to be felt till the appropriate remedy is applied.” He then 
stated the details of the measure, by which the whole of the heritable 
jurisdictions in Scotland were at once to be swept away, root and 
branch, and the King’s judges were to make circuits twice a year for the 
trial of all offenders. 

Lord Hardwicke concluded by laying his bill upon the table, and 
moving that it be read a first time; but as compensation was to be 
given, he stated on a subsequent day that it must commence in the 
House of Commons, There it was brought in by the Attorney-Gene- 
ral, Sir Dudly Ryder, and passed with little opposition. When it came 
up to the Lords it was strongly opposed by the Duke of Beaufort, and 
other Jacobitically inclined Peers, but the Chancellor left the defence of 
it to the Duke of Argyle, without again entering into its merits. The 


Union is a very strong but not a conclusive objection to it. On this doctrine I acted 

when I supported the entire abolition of the Court of Admiralty, and the substantial 

abolition of the Court of Exchequer in Scotland, both declared by the articles of 

Union to be for ever established in that country; and by this doctrine I should be 

gues if any law were proposed for modifying the Protestant Episcopal Church in 
reland. 


LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE. 113 


opponents of the bill did not venture to divide the House upon it, and 
satisfied themselves with a violent protest.* It certainly does high 
honour to its author. From the time that it came into full operation, 
and not from the Union, commences the prosperity of Scotland, which 
having been the idlest, poorest, and most turbulent country in Europe, 
has become one of the most industrious, the most improving, and the 
most orderly. 

But such is the imperfection of human wisdom, such a mixture of 
praise and censure is meted out to the most clear-seeing legislators, that 
I am obliged immediately to record another Scottish measure of Lord 
Hardwicke, which greatly endangered and considerably retarded the 
good effects of that which I have so cordially applauded. Provision 
being made for the due administration of justice, conciliation was now 
the obvious policy to reclaim the Highlands ; but because a deep resent- 
ment was manifested agdinst the barbarities of the Duke of Cumberland, 
and there were enthusiastic rejoicings at the escape of the young Che- 
valier, after all the perils to which he had ‘been exposed, and’ because 
there had been a not unnatural combination to oppose the abolition of 
the heritable jurisdictions between the Lords to be restrained, and the 
vassals to be protected by it, who all cried out with equal violence that 
it was an encroachment on the ancient rights and privileges of Scots- 
men,—Lord Hardwicke, instead of affording a little time for those feel- 
ings to subside, in the ensuing session introduced a ‘ Coercion Bill,” 
which added insult to injury, for it not only contained clauses for uni- 
versally disarming the Highlanders, but forbidding them [May, 1748 
to use the tartan, “which they said and believed had dis- ; al 
tinguished their ancestors since the time of Ossian and long before. 
Instead of plaids and philibegs, and trews, they were, henceforth, to be 
clothed in coats and in waistcoats, and (worst of all) in BreEcneEs!!! 
This unpopular bill was strongly opposed in both houses, but was car- 
ried by large majorities, for there was then a strong prejudice against 
the Highlanders. People had not forgotten the alarm and consternation 
into which a small band of them had thrown all England; most un- 
founded stories were propagated respecting atrocities imputed to them 
in their march to Derby, and it was highly popular in the South by 
acts of Parliament to heap upon them all sorts of indignity. Unfortu- 
nately the debates upon the bill are lost, except respecting one insigni- 
ficant clause about preventing priests from officiating in Scotland who 
were ordained by nonjuring Bishops. This the English Bishops assailed 
as an attack on the spiritual jurisdiction of Christ’s church, and they 
rejected it in the committee,t but on the report, Lord Hardwicke made 
a strong speech in its favour. In reference to Charles’s landing at Moi- 
dart, he said, ‘* Rebellion may take its rise in one of the remotest,—one 
of the smallest and least populous corners of this island :— 


*.14 Parl. Hist. 1-57. t 32, including 20 Bishops, against 29 lay Lords. 


VOL. V. 8 


14 REIGN OF GEORGE IL 


‘ Mobilitate viget, viresque acquirit eundo: 
Parva metu primo; mox sese attollit in auras, 
.... et magnas territat urbes,’ 


I am astonished, my Lords, to hear any regulation called cruelty 
that may tend towards preventing such a rebellion for the future. 
What is the form of ordination among those who call themselves non- 
juring bishops, or what confessions, promises, or vows, they exact from 
the persons they ordain, I do not certainly know; but I believe that no 
man will be ordained by one of them who is not a Jacobite in his heart ; 
and an exclusion of all such from the exercise of their function in any 
part of his Majesty’s dominions is, I think, absolutely necessary for the 
public safety. As to the encroachment made by this clause upon the 
rights or privileges of the Christian church, I do not pretend to be so 
good a judge as the Right Reverend Prelates; but, as far as I am 
master of the subject, I cannot conceive what #he rights and privileges 
of the Christian church have to do in this question. We do not by 
this clause pretend to annul the holy orders granted by a nonjuring 
bishop, nor do we pretend that the civil magistrate has any power 
to determine whether a priest has been regularly ordained, or a 
bishop duly consecrated ; but, surely, the supreme legislature in every 
state has power to determine who shall be allowed to exercise the office 
of priest or bishop within its territory.” The clause was restored,* 
To the enactments for the universal seizure of arms, the most cap- 
tivating objection was, that they made no distinction between Jacobites 
and Georgites. The loyal clans murmured “ that, after having de- 
fended the King upon the throne, they were forbidden for the future to 
defend themselves, and that the sword was forfeited which had been 
legally employed.” I believe such measures are powerless to put down 
disaffection, and rather excite irritation than cripple the means of annoy- 
ing the established government. The Highlanders were first reconciled to 
the House of Hanover by the great Lord Chatham, who pursued to- 
wards them a policy very different from that of Lord Hardwicke’s 
* Coercion Bill,” for he put arms into their hands, and called upon 
them, with confidence, to fight against the enemies of their country.t 
It is amusing to find Dr. Johnson ascribing the tranquillity he observed 
in the Highlands, in the year 1773, to an act which, having prolonged 
agitation for a while, had soon become a dead letter,—the very memory 
of it having been blotted out by a more generous and wiser policy. 
‘“‘ The last law,” says he, ‘* by which the Highlanders are deprived of 
their arms, has operated with efficacy beyond expectation.” His re- 
marks are more amusing, and therefore more valuable, on the clauses 
respecting the Highland garb. ‘In the Islands the plaid is rarely 
worn, The law by which the Highlanders have been obliged to change 


* 37 to 32, 

+ “I remember how I employed the very rebels in the service and defence of their 
country. They were reclaimed by this means: they fought our battles; they cheer- 
fully bled in defence of those liberties which they had attempted to overthrow but a 
few years before."—Lord Chatham's Speech in the House of Lords, 2d Dec. 1777. 


LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE. 115 


the form of their dress has, in all the places that we have visited, 
been universally obeyed. I have seen only one gentleman completely 
clothed in the ancient habit, and by him it was worn only occasionally 
and wantonly. The common people do not think themselves under 
any legal necessity of having coats ; for they say that the law against 
plaids was made by Lord Chancellor Hardwicke, and was in force only 
for his life; but the same poverty that made it then difficult for them to 
change their clothing, hinders them now from changing it again.” In- 
stead of breaking the spirit of the clans, this tyrannical law only helped 
to keep up clannish distinctions and customs. In Lord Hardwicke’s 
lifetime it was evaded by Highlandmen carrying a pair of breeches, 
suspended by a stick, over their shoulders ; for the Highlanders wear- 
ing a short petticoat like the Romans,—thought, like the Romans, with 
contempt of all to whom the line of Ovid might be applied,— 





“Jaxis arcent mala frigora braccis,’”’* 


Jacobitism was not completely extinguished in the Highlands, till Lord 
Hardwicke’s obnoxious act was repealed on the motion of the late Duke 
of Montrose, who showed himself a wiser man than the Chancellor, 
and who, for his patriotism, was thus celebrated in the Rolliad :' 


“Thee, Graham! thee the frozen chieftains bless, 
Who feel thy bounties through their fav’rite dress ; 
By these they view their rescued country clad 
In the bleak honours of their long-lost plaid ; 

Thy patriot zeal has bar’d their parts behind 

To the keen whistlings of the wintry wind. 

While lairds the dirk, while lasses bagpipes prize, 
And oatmeal cake the want of bread supplies ; 
The scurvy skin white scaly scabs enrich, 

While contact gives and brimstone cures the itch ; 
Each breeze that blows upon these brawny parts 
Shall wake thy loved remembrance in their hearts ; 
And while they freshen from the northern blast, 
So long thy honour, name, and praise shall last.” 


Lord Hardwicke, after these exertions, talked so much of his fatigue 
and desire of ease, as actually to create a belief among 1748. 
those who did not know him well, that he was going [a.p ] 
to give up his office for one less laborious: ‘‘ We talk much,” writes 
Horace Walpole to his correspondent at Florence, ‘ of the Chancellor 
resigning the Seals, from weariness of the fatigue,—and being made 
President of the Council—with other consequent changes ; but as this 
has already been a discourse of six months, I don’t give it you for cer- 
tain.”t Had the Chancellor been suddenly required to resign, he would 
have felt like the old man when Death actually appeared to him to re- 
lieve him of his burden, 

For several succeeding years his political career becomes obscure, 


* Trist. v. 7. Pronouncing the ¢ before i, as the Italians do, and the Romans 
probably did, it is wonderful with how little change of sound this word has de- 
scended to us from our Saat dip ancestors.—See Luc. i. 430. 

+ Letter to Sir H. Mann, 2d Dee, 1748. 


116 REIGN OF GEORGE II. 


partly from the quietness of the times, and partly from the growing de- 
ficiency of our parliamentary records. ‘The treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle 
excited no discussion in the Lords, and, notwithstanding the machina- 
tions of the Prince of Wales and his party, the Chancellor, sitting on 
the woolsack, seems to have enjoyed nearly a sinecure. Mr. Pelham, 
with his unostentatious virtues, enjoyed the confidence both of the 
Sovereign and of the people, and, while he lived, faction was stilled 
almost into Silence. ‘The Chancellor in those halcyon days only came 
forward on occasions of ceremony, such as the choice of a Speaker, 
and, to keep his name before the public, he then tried to say something 
smart, which he would not have thought of had he been to take part in a 
debate on which the fate of the ministry might depend.* Compliments 
to Speaker Onslow, and such commonplaces, however prettily turned, 
have lost all their interest. 

The Mutiny Bill, which now passes as quietly as any road bill, still 
continued an annual occasion for patriots to declaim against a standing 
army. In 1749, the Lord Chancellor found it necessary to reply to 
them in a speech curious for the view it gives of the state of public 
feeling which prevailed while Prince Charles was advancing to Derby, 
and of the danger to which the government was then exposed. ‘* When 
the late rebellion broke out, I believe most men were convinced that, if 
the rebels had succeeded, popery as well as slavery would have been 
the certain consequence: and yet what a faint resistance did the people 
make in any part of the kingdom ?—so faint, that had we not been so 
lucky as to procure a number of regular troops from abroad time enough 
to oppose their approach, they might have got possession of our capital 
without any opposition, except from the few soldiers we had in London, 
and the fate of the kingdom would have depended upon a battle fought 
within a few miles of this city. Whilst the people therefore remain in 
their present unarmed and undisciplined condition, let the consequence 
be what it will, we must keep up a standing force, and no one ever 
heard of an army being long kept up in any country in the world with- 
out military laws and court-martials for holding the officers and soldiers 
to their duty. But these officers and soldiers are still our fellow-citi- 
zens, actuated by the same feelings with ourselves, and while they pre- 
serve internal quiet and defend us from foreign aggression, they would 
join us to preserve the constitution instead of combining against us to 
overturn it.”{ After a few patriotic sallies on the subversion of liberty 
by military violence, the bill was carried, and dulness again overspread 
the House—till a great excitement was produced by a melancholy event 
which changed the succession to the throne. 


* 14 Parl. Hist. 93; 15 Parl. Hist. 328. 

+ About this time Lord Hardwicke was elected High Steward of the University 
of Cambridge, an honour which he held for his life, and which was long enjoyed by 
his posterity. ' 

114 Parl. Hist. 451. 


LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE. 117 


CHAPTER CXXXV. 


CONTINUATION OF THE LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE TILL HE RESIGNED 
THE GREAT SEAL. 


Tue sudden death of Frederick, Prince of Wales, in the flower of 
his age, which was little regretted at Court, placed Lord Hardwicke in 
a situation of considerable embarrassment, but he extricated himself 
from it with his usual prudence. The present heir [Marcn, 1751.] 
apparent, afterwards George III., being no more than 
twelve years old, and George II. being sixty-seven, it was indispensably 
necessary that provision should be made for the exercise of the royal 
authority on a demise of the Crown. The King wished much that the 
Regent to be named should be his favourite son, the Duke of Cumber- 
land, who was himself strongly of opinion that the distinction was due 
to his station as first Prince of the blood, and to his services as the 
victor of Culloden ; but this Prince, notwithstanding some high qualities 
which belonged to him, was now so unpopular that when his brother’s 
death was announced, the general cry was,—*‘ Oh / that it were the But- 
cher !” and his appointment as Regent would only have been satisfac- 
tory to the Jacobites. Lord Hardwicke suggested to Pelham and the 
Duke of Newcastle, that preference should be given to the Dowager 
Princess of Wales, who had been obnoxious to the Court during her 
husband’s life, but on his death had behaved with such great propriety 
that no personal objection could be started to her. The King reluc- 
tantly acquiesced, on the condition that she should be controlled by a 
Council of regency, of which the Duke should be president. The diffi- 
culty now was to announce the plan to his Royal Highness; and this 
task was devolved upon the Chancellor, who accordingly waited upon 
him, and in the most respectful manner showed him the heads ef the 
proposed Regency Bill, enlarging on the weight which he would have 
in the council. Deeply disappointed at not grasping the whole royal 
power as Regent, he said sternly,—‘ Return my thanks to the King for 
the plan of the Regency. As to the part allotted to me, I shall submit, 
because he commands it!” The bill passed both Houses with little 
dificulty, and Lord Hardwicke still preserved his ascendency. 

This year he deserves the credit, which I am sorry to say does not 
always belong to Chancellors, of supporting a useful 

ay. AS [a. D., 1751.] 
measure proposed by a political opponent. Lord Ches- 
terfield, dismissed from his offices, embraced every opportunity of an- 
noying the government; but having brought forward, with the assistance 
of Lord Macclesfield, son of the Chancellor, his famous bill for the re- 
formation of the Calendar, according to the Gregorian computation of 
time, by making the year commence, for all purposes, on the first of 


118 REIGN OF GEORGE Il 


January, instead of the 25th of March, by suppressing in September, 
1752, the eleven days the old style had fallen behind, so that the day 
following the 2d of that month should be called the 14th, and by insert- 
ing certain intercalary days in time to come.* During some preceding 
Chancellorships, | am afraid the noble and learned President of the 
assembly, disliking trouble and responsibility,—perhaps grudging a 
little credit to a rival,—perhaps meaning to bring in the same bill him- 
self at a futtlte time,—would have left the woolsack, and with faint com- 
pliments to the good intentions of the mover, would have pointed out the 
danger of innovation,—the disturbance of contracts which the change 
would occasion,—the height of prosperity and happiness which the 
nation had reached under the old computation of time,—and the degra- 
dation of copying the example of the French, our natural enemies, and 
the Pope, the foe of our holy reformed faith. Had Lord Hardwicke 
followed this course, he might easily have defeated the opposition leaders, 
and we might still have been adhering, like the Muscovites, to the old 
Calendar, exploded by all civilized nations. But he candidly supported 
the bill, and with his countenance, it passed so easily that people were 
astonished the reformation had been so long delayed.t 

In 1752, the only public measure in which Lord Hardwicke took 
an ostensible part, was a bill for annexing the forfeited estates in Scot- 
land to the Crown, and encouraging Englishmen and lowland Scotsmen 
to settle upon them. ‘This measure, in the result, operated favourably, 
by preserving the estates for the families of the individuals who had 
been attainted ; but I cannot commend it, for it was meant as a measure 
of severity against them. Lord Hardwicke defended it on the ground 
that, if the estates were sold, they would be purchased at a low price 
for the former owners, and that there were fictitious charges upon them 
which would run away with the whole of the purchase-money—cen- 
suring, but in a manner not very mortifying to them, the whole Scottish 
nation, whom he seems to have considered “ aliens in blood, language 
and religion.” The noble Duke, said he, ‘is so sanguine as to hope 
that all these fraudulent claims may be detected ; but, from experience, 
I am inclined to entertain no such hopes. The people of that country 
are so faithful to one another, in every case in which they think their 
honour concerned, that no reward can tempt them, no terror can 
frighten them, to betray their trust: they will take any oath you can 
frame rather than discover what they think their honour obliges them 
to conceal, and this fidelity reaches even to the very lowest of the people. 
Their contempt of rewards is proved by the escape of the young Pretender, 


* 24 Geo. 2, c. 23. 

t 14 Parl. Hist. 979; Lord Chesterfield’s Letters to his Son; Dr. Matty’s Life of 
Lord Chesterfield. Had Lord Hardwicke been inclined to crush the measure, he 
had an ample pretext in the manner in which it was first received by the Duke of 
Newcastle, the ostensible head of the government in the House of Lords. Says 
Chesterfield ; ‘His Grace was alarmed at so bold an undertaking, and entreated me 
not to stir matters that had been long quiet; adding, that he did not love new- 
fangled things.” 


LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE., 119 


and their disregard of threats by the impunity of the murder of Captain 
Porteous,”’* 

The year 1753 is memorable in the life of Lord Hardwicke by his 
Jew Brin and his Marrrace Brit, for both of which I think he de- 
serves credit. From the fatuous fears and furious cries which the 
former occasioned, it has generally been represented as “ a bill by its 
own vigour at once to confer all the rights of natural-born British sub- 
jects on all foreign Jews who might set foot on English ground ;” 
whereas it merely allowed bills to be brought in for naturalizing Jews 
without their having taken the sacrament of the Lord’s supper accord- 
ing to the rites of the Church of England, or, in other words, to allow 
that.a Jew might be naturalized by act of Parliament. After some 
sharp debates, the bill passed both Houses, and received the royal as- 
sent; but from there being then no reports of Parliamentary proceedings 
printed, its nature was so grossly misrepresented that great odium was 
cast upon the Chancellor as its author; and the Bishop of Norwich, 
who voted for it, soon after, holding a confirmation, he was called upon 
by the mob “ to administer the rite of circumcision,” and a paper was 
affixed to the church doors, stating that “next day being Saturday, his 
Lordship would confirm the Jews, and on the day following, the 
Christians.” Such was the ferment in the nation that ministers became 
alarmed—particularly as a general election was approaching,—and in 
a very dastardly manner they agreed to abandon this measure, which, 
if persisted in, might have introduced upon reflection a more liberal 
feeling into the public mind, and accelerated by a century the religious 
freedom which we now enjoy.t 

Lord Hardwicke’s Marriage Act, with considerable modifications and 
improvements, remains in force, and regulates in England the most im- 
portant of all contracts,—upon which civil society itself depends. 
Hitherto the old canon law had prevailed, according to which a valid 
marriage was constituted either by the mere consent of the parties, or 
by the presence of a priest in orders, at any time or place, without the 
sanction of parents or guardians, although one or both of the parties might 
be under age,—and without any registration or public act affording the 
means of knowing whether such a marriage had been contracted. 
This does seem to me a very defective state of the law although it exists 
in the northern part of the island, and is there defended by sensible 
men. It is of importance for the protection of minors that they should 
not be permitted to enter into this contract by their own mere fantasy, 
when they are wholly incapacitated to enter into others of the most 
trifling nature, and it is important to society in general, that a form— 


* 14 St. Tr. 1237, 1248, 

+ 14 Parl. Hist. 1365-1442; 15 Parl. Hist. 91-163. By way of apology, Lord 
Hardwicke said—* However much the people may be misled, yet in a free country 
I do not think an unpopular measure ought to be obstinately persisted in. We 
should treat the people as a skilful and humane physician would treat his patient; 
if they nauseate the salutary draught we have prescribed, we should think of some 
other remedy, or we should delay administering the prescription till time or change 
of circumstances has removed the nausea.” 


120 REIGN OF GEORGE II. 


simple and notorious,—should be specified, which shall be essential, 
and which shall be sufficient for constituting the contract, and the 
evidence of which shall be open to all mankind, Although we reject 
the Roman Catholic doctrine that marriage is a sacrament, it is highly 
desirable that a religious service should accompany the celebration of it, 
to create a deep sense of the solemnity of the obligation thereby con- 
tracted; but as so many object to such a service, and all should be 
permitted to¥marry, it ought not to be considered indispensable. 

Various striking instances of the inconveniences and hardships re- 
sulting from the then existing law had recently occurred. Young heirs 
and heiresses, scarcely grown out of infancy, had been inveigled into 
mercenary and disgraceful matches, and persons living together as hus- 
band and wife for many years, and become the parents of numerous 
offspring, were pronounced to be in a state of concubinage, their chil- 
dren being bastardised, because the father had formerly entangled him- 
self in some promise which amounted to a precontract, and rendered 
his subsequent marriage a nullity. In the public prisons—particularly 
in the Fleet—there were degraded and profligate parsons, for a small 
fee, ready to marry all persons at all hours there, or to go when sent 
for to perform the ceremony in taverns or in brothels. The public 
attention had been particularly drawn to the subject by a case of very 
flagrant oppression, which had appeared on the hearing of an appeal 
before the House of Lords, and the Judges were ordered to prepare a 
bill to remedy the evils complained of. ‘Their bill did not please the 
Chancellor, who himself undertook the task with great earnestness. 
His own performance was not in a great taste. . He declared null all 
marriages which were not celebrated by a priest in orders, either under 
banns or license, declaring in the case of minors the license void with- 
out the consent of parents or guardians—the banns to be for three 
successive Sundays in the parish church—and the granting of ordinary 
and special licenses to be subject to certain regulations—the ceremony 
to be performed by a priest according to the liturgy of the Church of 
England. The first great blot upon the measure was, that it required 
Roman Catholics, Dissenters: and others who might have serious 
scruples of conscience against being married according to the prescribed 
service (the least felicitous in the English liturgy) to submit to it,—or 
debarred them from matrimony altogether. Another great defect was, 
that no provision was made by it respecting the marriage out of Eng- 
land of persons domiciled in England, so as to prevent the easy evasion 
of it by a trip to Gretna Green. The measure was likewise highly 
objectionable in making no provision for the marriage of illegitimate 
children—who had no parents recognised by law, and could only have 
guardians by an application to the Court of Chancery,—and in declar- 
ing marriages which were irregular by reason of unintentional mistakes 
in banns or licenses, absolutely void, although the parties might live 
long together as man and wife, having a numerous issue considered 
legitimate until the discovery of the irregularity. 

Lord Hardwicke laid the bill on the table, and explained its provisions 


LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE, 121 


at the commencement of the session. On the second reading, the Duke 
of Bedford made a speech against it; but it passed easily through the 
Lords. In the Commons, however, it experienced the most furious 
opposition, particularly from Henry Fox, who was supposed to feel very 
deeply on the subject, because he himself had run off with Lady Caro- 
line Lennox, eldest daughter of the Duke of Richmond, and married 
her without the consent of her family. 

I cannot compliment him, or the other opposers of the bill, on the topics 
they employed. Instead of pointing out its real defects, which in 
practice were found oppressive and mischievous, they absurdly denied 
the right of Parliament to legislate upon the subject; they dwelt upon 
the aristocratic tendency of the bill; they denounced it as leading to 
vice and immorality ; they prophesied that it would thin our population, 
and endanger our existence as a nation. Fox, who kept the bill in 
committee many nights, became so heated by his own opposition to it 
against Murray, the Solicitor-General, and other lawyers who defended 
t, that he inveighed bitterly against all lawyers and their jargon. He 
even indulged in a personal attack upon its author, whom he designated 
“the great Murti,’ whom he accused of pride and arrogance, and 
whose motives in bringing it forward he described as selfish and sordid.* 
On a subsequent evening he made an apology for these expressions, and 
declared his high respect for the learning and integrity of the noble and 
learned Lord he was supposed to have alluded to. 

The bill at last passed the Commons by a majority of 125 to 56, and 
was sent back to the Lords. When the amendments were to be con- 
sidered, the Murtr resolved to have his revenge ; and as the Parliament 
was to be prorogued the following day, he knew that he was safe from 
a rejoinder. In a most unusual manner, he read his observations from 
a paper which he held in his hand, as if he were afraid to trust himself 
to express his excited feelings ; and he commented, with much warmth 
and asperity, on the conduct of Fox, whom he designated as ‘*a dark, 
gloomy, and insidious genius, an engine of personality and faction ;” 
thus concluding his philippic: ‘ I despise the invective, and I despise the 
retractation; I despise the scurrility, and [ despise the adulation.” 
Fox, who had that evening attended some ladies to Vauxhall, being 
soon told by a good-natured friend how he had been abused in the 
House of Lords, gathered some young members of Parliament round 
him, and told them, with great eagerness, that he wished the session 
had lasted a little longer, as, in that case, ‘‘ he would have paid off the 
Lord Chancellor with interest.” + 


* T suppose it was from this vituperation that the vulgar said out of doors that the 
Chancellor was afraid his own children would form some low connexion in marriage 
—whereas they were all already married into the first families. 

+ According to Cooksey, in the warmth of his invective he called his antagonist 
“that bad, black man.”—Cooks. 103. 

t 15 St. Tr. 84-86, It is curious how this hatred of Lord Hardwicke’s Marriage 
Bill descended to Henry Fox’s posterity. His son, the celebrated Charles James, 
several times abused it in the House of Commons; and I myself have frequently 
heard his grandson, the late Lord Holland, in private, express high disapprobation 


122 REIGN OF GEORGE II. 


The session of 1754 passed over without a single debate in the 
House of Lords ; but, in the midst of the profoundest quiet, a storm of 
short duration was suddenly raised by the death of the prime minister, 
Mr. Pelham. Till his brother could decently appear, Lord Hardwicke 
was called into council by the King, and, according to his own account, 
he was for some days prime minister. In a letter from him to Mr. 
Pitt, which seems to have escaped the notice of historians and memoir 
writers, he giwes an interesting account of this crisis. After apologising 
for not sooner replying to a communication he had received from Mr, 
Pitt, he proceeds :—* Besides this, I have lived in such continual hurry, 
ever since the day of our great misfortune, Mr. Pelham’s death,— 


Ile dies, quem semper acerbum, 
Semper honoratum (sic Dii voluistis) habebo, 





that I have no time for correspondence. 

“The general confusion called upon somebody to step forth; and 
the Duke of Newcastle’s overwhelming affliction and necessary con- 
finement threw it upon me. I wasa kind of minister ab aratro, I 
mean the Chancery plough, and am not displeased to be returned to it, 
laborious as it is to hold. I never saw the King under such deep con- 
cern since the Queen’s death. His Majesty seemed to be unresolved : 
professed to have no favourite for the important employment vacant, and 
declared that he would be advised by his cabinet council, with the Duke 
of Devonshire added to them.”* Ina few days the Duke of Newcastle 
was placed at the head of the Treasury, and Lord Hardwicke was 
again secure in his office of Chancellor, and, if possible with more in 
fluence. Now he was created Earl of Hardwicke and Viscount Roys- 
ton. It is said that he might sooner have enjoyed this elevation, as far 
as the King was concerned, had not a superior power interposed. 
One of his biographers, in giving an account of his two daughters and 


of it—still adhering to the old doctrine, that marriage should be contracted when 
and where and how the parties please—and therefore still censuring the last Mar- 
riage Bill, which I had the honour to assist in framing, and which I consider quite 
perfect. I excuse a churchman who says that the Church alone ought to lay down 
regulations for marriages, and judge of its validity ; but I cannot understand how a 
statesman who allows it to be a civil contract can deny that the manner of entering 
into it may be regulated by law as much as the manner of entering into a contract 
to purchase goods or to let land. 
* The writer proceeds at great length to try to persuade Mr. Pitt that he had been 
labouring to bring him into office; and having stated the opposing difficulties, he 
‘thus concludes; “IT agree that this falls short of the mark; but it gives encourage- 
ment. It is more than a colour for acquiescence in the eyes of the world; it is a 
demonstration of fact. No ground arises from hence to think of retirement rather 
than of courts and business, We have all of us our hours wherein we wish for those 
otia tuta ; and I have mine frequently: but I have that opinion of your wisdom, of 
your concern for the public, of your regard and affection for your friends, that I will 
not suffer myself to doubt that you will continue to take an active part. There 
never was a. fairer field in the House of Commons for such abilities, and I flatter 
myself that the execution of them will complete what is now left imperfect,’* 


' Lord Hardwicke to Mr. Pitt, 2d April, 1754. 


LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE. 123 


of his wife, thus explains the delay. ‘* Both these young ladies my in- 
furmer has often seen at Powis House (his town residence) opening the 
door of their mother’s apartment (where he had the honour of attending 
her during the settling her domestic accounts, on Monday mornings), 
and, with the most graceful deference, asking what company was 
expected, and in what manner they should dress for the day? Having 
received her Ladyship’s directions, they courtesied and withdrew. On 
this she observed, that the Lord Chancellor was in a hurry to be made 
an Earl, which the King would make him any day he chose it, but I 
delay itas much as [ can. These girls you see submitting, with so 
much humility and observance, to consult me even in the little article 
of dress, would perhaps, by the acquisition of titles, be transformed into 
fine ladies, and abate in their respects to me. ‘Their fortune, too, on 
marriage must be doubled. ‘Ten thousand pounds, which would be 
deemed a sufficient fortune for a Miss Yorke, must be made twenty to 
a Lady Elizabeth and Lady Margaret.”* These young ladies had 
been recently married, the one to the celebrated navigator Lord Anson, 
and the other to Sir Gilbert Heathcote. 

In the year 1755 the political horizon began to blacken. Domestic 
politics were much perplexed by the machinations of Leicester House, 
and by the Duke of Newcastle’s doubts whether he should ally himself 
with Pitt or with Fox, while hostilities being ready to break out on the 
Continent, the King, for the protection of Hanover, had entered into 
subsidiary treaties with Russia and Hesse Cassel, which were exceed- 
ingly unpopular. On the meeting of, Parliament these treaties were 
furiously assailed in the House of Lords, and the defence of them rested 
chiefly on the Chancellor ; for the new prime minister, although he had 
considerable volubility of gabble, was quite incapable of reasoning, and 
was only listened to that he might be laughed at. There is no tolerable 
report of Lord Hardwicke’s speech on this occasion, but we have what 
must be considered more curious and more valuable, the notes which 
he made for it, in his own handwriting, showing the immense pains 
which he still took to prepare himself, notwithstanding all his experience, 
and all the authority which he possessed. si 


* Cooksey, 38, 
+ Introductory Observations. 


Foreigners, if present, must be surprised. 
No false colours needful to support—only to wash off false colours thrown upon it 
to sully it. 
All the objections reducible to two general heads— 
, Legal—Political. 


1. Legal. 
Restrictive clause in Act of Settlement. 


State it. 


1. A previous objection. 
No subsidiary treaty at all to be made without the previous appr obation of Parlia- 
ment. 


124 REIGN OF GEORGE II 


The last speech which Lord Hardwicke ever delivered in the House 
[May 24, 1756 of Peers as Chancellor, was at the close of the session 
Sint elo 1756, when the disagreeable task was assigned to 


This depends on the general rules of the constitution. 
Mere imagination. 
Fertility of genius. 
2, Strictly on the Act of Settlement. 
No such subgidiary, in which the King’s German dominions may be included, to 
be made without the previous approbation of Parliament. 
Construction of the clause of restriction. 
Practice upon it ever since the late King’s accession. 
Treaties of guaranty. 
General defensive alliances. 
Treaty of Hanover, 1725. 
Hessian Treaty of 1740. 
Russian Treaty of 1741, almost in the same words with that of 1742, 
Times of making these two last treaties, 
Times of laying them before Parliament. 
Acts done by the administration in execution of these treaties. 
Times of those acts. 
Nobody then thought of suggesting it to be a breach of the Act of Settlement. 
Reserved for the sagacity, the penetration of these times. 


2. Ozssections—Political. 


These treaties were considered in three lights: 
1, A measure to kindle—to invite—a general war upon the Continent. 
2. A measure singly for the defence of the German dominions. 
3, A preventive measure. 


1. The first Light. 
No colour for it. 
Made against no power—offensive to no power. 
A great prince often and freely mentioned. 
Sorry for it—groundless—imprudent. 
He has made no representation against it. 


It has been explained to him in its true light—in the most amicable, confidential 
manner. 


Communicated to his minister. 


A Treaty of Defence against whatsoever power shall be the aggressor against the 
King or any of his allies. 


Qui capit ille facit. 


Whoever shall attack, becomes subject to this diversion, if the King thinks fit to 
make the requisition. 


France—Sweden. 


The party who makes the requisition, and who is to pay the subsidy, has the 
right to fix the place of the diversion. ; 


Some of the dominions of Sweden almost as much within the vicinity as thoSe of 
Prussia. 


Sweden the most liable to the seduction of France—has ships of war. Thisis a 
most convenient check. 

The King of Prussia a great and most respectable power—a prince of great parts 
and penetration. Not governed by passions of affection or resentment, but by his 
interest, judged of by his prudence. Apt to cast his eyes about to all quarters. 


Wonld he like to give oceasion to a French army to march into the empire on the 
one side, and a Russian army on the other ? 


LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE. 125 


him of throwing out the Militia Bill. Hostilities with France had now 
commenced : the Duke of Richelieu had sailed on his expedition against 
Minorca ; serious apprehensions were entertained of invasion ; some 


2d Light. A Measure singly for the Defence of Hanover. 

That is one object—not the sole one. 
1. Defence of his Majesty’s kingdoms, 

2. of his German dominions, 

3. of his allies. 

It isyeven not for the defence of the German dominions at all, unless attacked on 
account of a British interest—a British cause—to be restrained in the very terms 
of the article—the most cautious, limited article that ever was penned. 








3d Light. A preventive Measure. 

This was said to be the most delusive pretence of all. 

*T was necessary to give harsh epithets to this way of stating it, because it is the 
true light, and the most justifiable one of all. 

A rule in controversy to do so. 

A great minister, who is dead,—much lamented, saw it in this light—in prospect 
of an American war approaching. 

Would you not, if possible, prevent a general war upon the Continent ? 

Is that most likely to be done by being totally unprovided, only having a certain 
strength there ? 

Declared to offend nobody, to defend against anybody. 

This question answers itself. 

This treaty takes its rise naturally out of the treaty of 1742—is built upon it. 


State how this stands. 
In the treaty of 1742, the Casus Feederis is defined in the 4th article. 
German dominions plainly included in it, 
Kingdoms, provinces, states, and possessions quelconques. 
The same description as in the treaty of Hanover. 
Can any man doubt whether the German dominions were comprised in that ? 
The treaty of 1742 differs from other defensive alliances in the 7th article, 


State this. 

No article for totis viribus. 

This new treaty takes its rise out of the 7th article. 

But when it came to a subsidy of 500,000 per ann, for 55,000 men, the King 
would not use words even to entitle himself to make such a requisition for Hanover, 
unless attacked on account of a British interest. 

This operates as a restriction. 

The most cautious, most gracious provision. 

No partiality for Hanover prevailed here. 


But I will go farther. Suppose, for a moment, that there should break out a war 
on the Continent. 


This may happen whether you will or not. 

No man of sense or integrity will maintain that you are by your present circum. 
stances absolved from your defensive alliances, 

How, then, will you perform them when called upon? Can you send your 
national troops? No. These troops and the Hessians must be your resort.. No 
man of sense or integrity will say that you can quite separate yourselves from the 
Continent. A commercial kingdom must have connexions there. 


Objections. 
Obj. 1. These troops to act by way of diversion only. 
Ans. That diversion may be made in Sweden—in the Netherlands—against any 


power which shall join in the war against you—in the country of any prince who 
may join with France in attacking Hanover, 


126 REIGN OF GEORGE II. 


German mercenaries were in English pay ; there was still a strong 
prejudice in the country against any considerable increase of the regular 
army, and the rage was for a national militia, in which all should be 
liable to serve for a limited period, which should be officered by country 
gentlemen, and which should not be sent out of the kingdom. A bill for 
establishing such a force being introduced into the Commons and sup- 


Obj. 2. Thea/th article of this treaty speaks of the proximity of the country 
wherein the diversion may be made. 

Ans. Only says probably—does not fix it to be there. 

Obj. Russia will, ifin any remote place, require subsistence for these troops. 

Ans. Will have no right to it. What may be done by way of douceur is another 

uestion, 
? Obj. 3. 12th article big with another subsidy, for passage through the territories 
of Poland. 

Ans, Nothing like it. Is it probable that Poland will refuse the passage to a 
Russian army? Look on their situation—their circumstances—the influence of 
Russia there. Asked no subsidy, nor made any difficulty of it, in 1747. 

Suppose, for a moment, should be refused. They may be brought by sea—em- 
barked at Riga in Livonia—landed at Lubeck—at Kiel, the capital of the Duke of 
Holstein, He is Great Prince of Russia—would he refuse a Russian army? At 
Slade, in the King’s own dominions. 


Have now gone through. 


Will not attempt to speak to your passions—will appeal to your unbiassed judg- 
ments. What is there criminal—what is there impolitic in this treaty? Where is 
the ground, I should have said the shadow of pretence, for the strong epithets, the 
uncommon language ? 

Will not retort that— 

Saying of one of the most able writers,—Mr. Chillingworth. 

“ Passionate expressions and vehement assertions are no arguments, unless it be 
of the weakness of the cause that is defended by them, or of the man that de- 
fends it.” 

As true a dilemma as ever was stated. Here it cannot be “ of the men” that 
defend it—I know their abilities—only the ether, branch of the dilemma left—“ the 
cause that is defended,” etc. 

Bat, for God’s sake, from whence proceeds all that unprovoked, unprecedented in- 
vective ? Have ministers in an instant changed their shapes? their natures ? 

One month panegyrised into angels,—the next transformed into monsters, 

This is not in the nature of things; not in the nature of measures—must proceed 
from some secret latent cause, which I will not pretend to explain. 


The present Administration. 


Are there not amongst them persons whose breasts glow with as much love for 
their country—are as popular in it—have as great a stake in the hedge of it ;—as 
free from the least suspicion of corruption—from seeking to profit by the distresses 
of their country, as any that were ever known in this kingdom ? 

But I go further. How void of colour, of shadow, is the impotent menace thrown 
out—the calling upon the judicial capacity of Parliament ? 

The thunder of your Lordships’ justice is a tremendous thing—not wantonly to 
be played with. 

Cannot people please themselves with courting power, unless it comes armed with 
vindictive judicial inflictions ? 

Puts me in mind of what I have read somewhere—I am not sure whether in my 
Lord Bacon or not, ’Tis in one of the moralisers upon the Heathen Mythology. 
He draws a moral out of the known fable of Jupiter and Semele. 

Tis this: ‘* Whoever courts power, armed with the thunder of vindictive inflic-. 
tions, it is ten to one but he is the first to suffer by it himself’—15 Parl. Hist. 643. 


LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE. - aa 


ported by Pitt, was so popular that the Government did not venture to 
oppose it there; but it was highly disagreeable to George II., as he 
thought it would interfere with his plan for hiring some additional Hano- 
verian regiments,—and the Duke of Newcastle was in too tottering a state 
to venture to thwart the King’s wishes. The bill was therefore doomed 
to meet its fate in the Upper House. When it had been ably supported 
by Earl Stanhope and the Duke of Bedford, the Lord Chancellor left 
the woolsack, and delivered a very ingenious pleading against it, of 
which we have a full report corrected and circulated by himself. He 
first tried to show that the bill was unconstitutional, and dangerous to 
the just prerogative of the Crown, comparing it with the Militia Bill 
proposed, and at last carried, without the royal assent, in the Long 
Parliament. ‘* The scale of power,” said he, ‘in this government has 
long been growing heavier on the democratical side. I think that this 
would throw a great deal of weight into it. What I contend for is, to 
preserve the limited monarchy entire, and nothing can do that but to 
preserve the counterpoise.” He next attached very undue weight to 
the omission of a clause to take away a writ of certiorari, to remove 
into the King’s Bench proceedings against persons employed in the 
militia, whereby ‘the Judges of that Court would be made inspec- 
tors-general of this army.” But he afterwards boldly and forcibly con- 
tended that it was much better that a state should be defended by.a 
certain portion of the population who should permanently take to arms 
as a profession, than that all the citizens in rotation should embrace a 
military life. ‘For my own part,” said he, ‘I never was more con- 
vinced of any proposition than of this, that a nation of merchants, 
manufacturers, artisans, and husbandmen defended by an army, is 
vastly preferable to a nation of soldiers, It is a self-evident proposition 
that, being educated and trained to arms, must give a distaste for all 
civil occupations. Amongst the common people it introduces a love of 
idleness, of sports, and at last of plunder. Consider, my Lords, the 
case of the northern parts of Scotland, and what you have been doing 
there for several years past. The practice and habit of arms made that 
people idle, averse to the labours of agriculture as well as the confine- 
ment of a factory,—followers of sports,—next of thieving,—and last, 
of rebellion, as @ more extensive source of plunder. 1 say a more 
extensive source of plunder, because | have always been of opinion 
that the love of thieving and rapine has been one main ingredient in the 
Highland insurrections as well as Jacobitism and clanship. In order to 
cure this mischief, and to lead or to compel them to be industrious, you 
have been obliged to disarm them by law. After having pursued these 
maxims, of which you are beginning to feel the benefit, will your Lord- 
ships now, by a new law, endeavour to introduce the same disposition 
and habit into the common people of England hitherto remarkable for 
their love of industry and their love of order?”* He likewise very 
strenuously opposed a clause in the bill, which, though petitioned 


* 15 Parl. Hist. 706-769. 


128 - REIGN OF GEORGE IL. 


against by the Dissenters, had passed without disapprobation from the 
established clergy, enacting, after the example of Switzerland and other 
Protestant states on the continent, that the militia should be exercised on 
Sundays after divine service. ‘If this institution,” said he, “be es- | 
tablished among us by a law, I will venture to foretell that, notwith- 
standing the injunction to go to church there will be a constant fair and 
scene of jollity in the several parishes where those exercises are kept, 
and the face of religion will soon be abolished in this country.” 

The bill was rejected by a majority of 59 to 23, but its rejection 
materially contributed to the overthrow of the administration,—now at 
hand. 

Parliament being prorogued in a few days, Newcastle tried to 

[May 27, 1756,] strengthen sale by fresh negotiations with bo- 

rough proprietors and with popular leaders, but 
news arrived of the retreat of Admiral Byng without an effort to relieve 
Port St. Philip’s, and of the entire loss of Minorca. The nation was in 
a greater ferment than at. the time of the Excise Bill. Not without 
reason, the loss and disgrace so deplored were ascribed to the ineffi- 
ciency of the present head of the government, and although he was 
strong in numbers in the House of Commons, and could do what he 
chose in the House of Lords, no one would join him,.* 

‘The immediate cause of the change of ministry was the sudden death 
of Sir Dudley Rider, Lord Chief Justice of the Court of King’s Bench. 
Pitt was at this time in hot opposition, and with such a theme as the dis- 
grace of our flag, was ready on the meeting of Parliament actually to 
crush the trembling premier. The only person in the House of Com. 
mons who “ had courage even to look him in the face,’ was Murray, 
the Attorney-General, who indeed had fought many a stout battle with 
him, and who, if so inclined, might still have entered the lists against 
him as the champion of the Government, but who now peremptorily 
insisted on his right to the vacant chiefship. He was not only, after 
Pitt, the best speaker in the House of Commons, but he was decidedly 
the greatest lawyer at the English bar; he had served many years as 
a law-officer of the Crown with the highest distinction, and having 
gallantly and faithfully exerted himself in the conflict while there was a 
chance of victory, now that a general defeat was inevitable, he consi- 
dered that he might honourably act upon the principle ‘ sawve qué peut.’ 
Newcastle, eager to retain him in the House of Commons, as a forlorn 


* When the defects of the Reform Bill are considered, the working of the old 
system should not be forgotten,—a striking instance of which is, that it imposed 
upon the King and the nation for several years, as prime minister, the Duke of 
Newcastle, a man disliked and despised by both. I suppose this was the weakest 
administration that ever was entrusted with power in a free country. Lord Hard- 
wicke was the only man of any capacity for business in the cabinet; and, after all, 
he was more ofa lawyer than a statesman, Lord Waldegrave gives us a lively pic- 
ture of one of their deliberations, when the subject was what orders should be sent 
out to Admiral Hawke: “ 'The Chancellor had more courage than the Duke of New- 
castle ; but, agreeable to the common practice of the law, was against b.inging the 
cause to an immediate decision” —Lord Waldegrave’s Mem., p. 46. 

t Lord Waldegrave’s Mem., p. 82, 


a 
LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE. 129 


hope, plied him with various proposals—a Tellership of the Exchequer 
—or the Duchy of Lancaster for life, or a pension of 20002. a year for 
life, in addition to the profits of his office as Attorney-General. Nay, 
the bidding rose to 60002, a year of pension : but Murray was inexorable ; 
nor would he even on any terms agree to remain in the House of Com- 
mons only one session longer, or one month, or one day to support the 
address. He declared in plain terms, that if they did not choose to 
make him Lord Chief Justice, he was determined to resign the office of 
Attorney-General, and that they must fight their own battles in the 
House of Commons, as he never again would enter that assembly. 
This spirited conduct had its proper effect ; he was made Chief Justice, 
and a Peer, by the title of Baron Mansfield. On the day when he took 
his seat in the Court of King’s Bench, the Duke of Newcastle, not 
daring to face Parliament, resigned. 

Lord Hardwicke, who had prompted him in all his negotiations,* 
finding that they had all failed, expressed a resolution to share his fate, 
and publicly intimated that he only retained the Great Seal for a few 
days to enable him to dispose of some causes which 
he had heard argued in the Court of Chancery. ARE 
He was strongly urged to continue Chancellor, with a view to strengthen 
the feeble administration now forming under that very honourable—not 
very able man,—the fourth Duke of Devonshire,—but he peremptorily 
refused. It is generally said that from age, and apprehended decline of 
faculties, he was anxious to retire. There is not the smallest foundation 
for this statement. His health and strength remained unimpaired, and 
his mind was as active, his perception as quick, and his judgment as 
sound, as when he served under Walpole ;} and although his fortune 


* “« My Lord Chancellor, with whom I do everything, and without whom I do 
nothing, has had a most material hand in all these arrangements. He sees and 
knows the truth of what I write ; and he judges as I do, that no other method but 
this could have been followed with any prospect of success.”—Duke of Newcastle 
to Mr. Pitt, 2d April, 1754. Lord Waldegrave gives a curious account of Lord 
Hardwicke’s demeanour ; when, as one expedient for strengthening the government, 
it was proposed to bring in Lord Bute, then supposed to be not only the leader of 
Leicester House, but the lover of the Princess of Wales : “The Chancellor, with his 
usual gravity, declared, that, for his own part, he had no particular objection to the 
Earl of Bute’s promotion; neither would he give credit to some very extraordinary 
reports; but that many sober and respectable persons would think it indecent, for 
which reason he could never advise his Majesty to give his consent.”—JLord Wal- 
degrave, 67. 

t One is surprised to find such nonsense written by so clever a man as Jeremy 
Bentham : “ At length perceiving, or imagining he perceived, his faculties growing 
rather impaired, he thought proper to resign the Seals, and accordingly waited upon 
the King, and delivered them into his Majesty’s own hands,” as if his resignation 
had been wholly unconnected with any political crisis. ‘ Dreading the loud cry of 
the people for impeachments and inquiries,” writes another, “ into the authors of 
those counsels which had brought the nation into such a calamitous and desperate 
situation, he wisely shrank from the storm he thought he saw bursting on his head, 
and in 1756 resigned the Seals.”—Cooksey, 81. Historians and biographers make 
sad mistakes when they begin to assign motives—which, however, they often do as 
peremptorily as if they had lived in familiar confidence with those whose actions 
they narrate, 

VOL, V. 9 


139 REIGN OF GEORGE IL 


was now enormous, his passion for increasing it, by all lawful means, had » 
grown in the same proportion. Others say (and they may be right) that 
he did not consider it honourable to continue in office after his great pa- 
tron and friend had been obliged to resign, but the new Ministry was still 
a Whig one, and no material change of policy was announced, either 
domestic or foreign, although the men now come in had clamoured for 
the ‘ Militia Bill,” and against the employment of Hano- 
[4.D. 1756.] verian troo H bably resigned because he 
ps. He more probably resigned bec 
knew that the ministry was very weak, and must be short-lived—per- 
haps anticipating that Newcastle, from his genius as a place-hunter, 
though contemptible in everything else, might soon extricate himself 
from his present difficulties, and that they might return to office together, 
with a fair prospect of being able to carry on the government. What- 
ever his reasoning or his motives might be,—at a Council held at St. 
James’s on the 19th of November, 1756, he actually did resign the 
Great Seal into the King’s hands, who received it from him with many 
expressions of respect and regret. 





CHAPTER CXXXVI. 


CONTINUATION OF THE LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE TILL THE DEATH OF 
GEORGE II, 


Lorp Harpwicke after his resignation continued to possess in a high 
degree the respect of all classes and of all parties. Lord Waldegrave, 
[a. . 1756.] rather disposed to depreciate him, says that, “ he resigned 
Tae ‘4 the Great Seal muchrto the regret of all dispassionate 
men, and indeed of the whole nation. He had been Chancellor near 
twenty years, and was inferior to few who had gone before him, having 
executed that high office with integrity, diligence, and uncommon 
abilities. The statesman might, perhaps, in some particular be the 
reverse of the judge ; yet even in that capacity he had been the chief 
support of the Duke of Newcastle’s administration.””* 

He had no retired allowance, but besides his own immense fortune, 
not only his sons, but all his kith, kin, and dependants, were satu- 
rated with places, pensions, and reversions. If he had been required to 
sacrifice the patronage which enabled him to confer such appanages 
upon them, he would have looked with contempt upon the retired allow- 
ance of a modern Chancellor. 

It is a curious fact, that although George II. had taken leave of him 
very tenderly, and had pressed him to come frequently to Court, when 
he presented himself a few days after at the levee in a plain suit of 
black velvet with a bag and sword, he was allowed to make his bow in 


* Lord Wald. Mem. 1756, p. 84. 


LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE, 131 


the crowd without the slightest mark of royal recognition. But as he 
was retreating, surprised, and mortified, he was called back by the Lord 
in waiting: the King apologized for not having known him when he 
first appeared without his full bottom, his robes, and the purse with the 
Great Seal in his hand, and renewed to him the assurance that his great 
services to the Crown were well known and remembered.’’* 

His conduct as an Ex-chancellor deserves great commendation. He 
now resided more than he had formerly been permitted to do at Wim- 
ple, but instead of torpidly wasting his days there, he tried to find plea- 
sure in literature; he took a lively interest in public affairs, and carried 
on a frequent correspondence with his political friends. Always when 
Parliament was sitting, and at other times when his presence in London 
could be serviceable to his party or the public, he was to be found at his 
town-house in Grosvenor Square. He attended as sedulously as ever 
to the judicial business of the House of Lords, the judgments being 
moved and dictated by him, his successor not being a Peer, and being 
sometimes obliged to put the question for reversing his own decrees without 
being at liberty to say a word in their defence. Lord Hardwicke also 
diligently attended at the Council Board when juridical cases came be- 
fore that tribunal. Although the common opinion is that he considered 
himself as having bid a final adieu to office, I cannot but suspect that 
he contemplated the chance of his being again Chancellor, and that with 
this view he was anxious to keep himself before the public, and from 
time to time to burnish up his legal armour. 

The first occasion of his taking any open part in politics after his 

‘resignation, was respecting the condemnation of Admiral Byng. A bill 
had passed the House of Commons to release the members of the court- 
martial, who had sentenced him to death, from their oath of secrecy, 
so that they might disclose the consultations which took place among 
themselves when deliberating upon his sentence.t In the House of 
Lords its fate depended entirely upon Lord Hardwicke, and he opposed 
it. For its rejection he was very severely blamed, and a cry was raised 
that “he wished Admiral Byng to be shot to screen the late administra- 
tion,”’—the multitude being misled by the unfeeling words blurted out 
by the Duke of Newcastle, when a deputation waited upon him from the 
city, complaining that Minorca had been abandoned : ‘It is the fault of 
the Admiral, he shall be tried immediately, he shall be hanged directly.” 
The sentence of death upon Byng was erroneous,—the Court, acquitting 
him of treachery and cowardice, having only found that * he had not 
done his utmost to relieve St. Philip's Castle, or to defeat the French 
fleet from mistake of gudgment ;” and the government was highly to be 


* Had he worn such a uniform as that invented by G seorge LV. for Ex-chancel- 
lors (very much like a Field Marshal), he could not have heen mistaken for a com- 
mon man. 

+ Noone contended that Parliament, like the Pope, might dispense with oaths.. 
The statute for the discipline of the navy required the members of naval courts. 
martial to take an oath “ not to disclose or discover the vote or opinion of any par:. 
ticular member, unless thereunto required by act of Parliament.” 


132 REIGN OF GEORGE IL 


censured for carrying it into eflect,—particularly after the unanimous re- 
commendation to mercy from the members of the court-martial. Never- 
theless, I think that the bill rested on no principle, and that Lord Hard- 
wicke would have been liable to severe censure if he had assisted in es- 
tablishing a dangerous precedent by sanctioning it. In the course he 
took, he was warmly supported by Lord Mansfield, who now began to 
show the rare example of a lawyer having great success in both Houses 
of Parliament, and who was destined to contest the palm of eloquence 
with the Earl of Chatham, as he had done with Mr. W. Pitt. They 
treated the subject with judicial accuracy and precision, showing that 
criminal justice could not be administered satisfactorily by any tribunal 
in the world if there were to be a public disclosure of the reasonings 
and observations of those who are to pronounce the verdict or judgment 
while they are consulting together. They therefore framed two ques- 
tions to be put to the members of the court-martial, all of whom were 
examined at the bar while the bill was pending. 1. “Do you know 
any matter that passed previous to the sentence upon Admiral Byng which 
may show that sentence to have been unjust?’ 2, ‘* Do you know any 
matter that passed previous to the said sentence which may show that 
sentence to have been given through any undue practice or motive 1” 
All (including Captain Keppel, at whose request the bill had been intro- 
duced) answered both questions in the negative. Lord Hardwicke then 
animadverted in a tone of the highest scorn upon the haste and _ heed- 
lessness with which the bill had passed in the House of Commons, and 
on his motion it was rejected without a decision. 
As every one had foreseen, the administration formed in the autumn 
[Apri, 1757] of 1756 soon crumbled to pieces, and after the dismissal 
‘ ‘tof Pitt and Lord Temple, for nearly three months the 
country was without a government, although a foreign war was raging, 
and dangerous discontent began to be engendered among the people. 
But, in the midst of disgrace and despondency, the nation was on the 
point of seeing the most glorious period of its annals; for now, instead 
ofa single victory in a European campaign, the flag of England was to 
ride triumphant on every sea, and territories to which the island of 
Great Britain was a mere speck on the globe, were to be added to her 
dominion. This state of things was brought about by a coalition between 
the greatest and the meanest of statesmen, Pitt and the Duke of New- 
castle; which was arranged chiefly under the auspices of Lord Hard- 
wicke.t The first personal interview was brought about by the follow- 
ing letter from him to Mr. Pitt :— 


* 15 Parl, Hist. 803-822 ; Hor. Walp. Mem. Geo. 2, vol. ii. 687. The House of 
Lords, in this instance, instead of forbidding the publication of their proceedings, 
themselves very wisely made an order “ that all the proceedings on the bill, with the 
evidence of the witnesses, should be printed and published under the authority of 
the House.”—Lords’ Journ. 1757. 

+ Lord Mansfield had previously tried his hand at mediating between the parties 
but in vain, 


LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE. 133 


“Wednesday, May 25, 1757. 
“se Sir, 

‘«¢[ have seen the Duke of Newcastle this morning, whois extremely 
willing and desirous to have a conference with you, and thinks it may 
be most useful to have a meeting first with yourself, before that which 
he will also be proud of having with my Lord Bute. He therefore pro- 
poses that his Grace and you should meet this evening at Lord Royston’s 
in St. James’s Square, where I may attend you. The family is out of 
town, and that place will be better than any of our houses, and you (if 
you approve it) may come so far in your chair whithout hazard. | 
should think between eight and nine o’clock would be a proper time, 
unless you have any objection to it—and then any other hour you shall . 
name.—lI beg you will send me notice to Powis House as soon as you 
can.” 


In a subsequent stage of the negotiation we find that, while Lei- 
cester House was still a party to it, Lord Hardwicke thus addressed Mr, 
Pitt :— 

“ Powis Housé, 16th June, 1757. 
<¢ Sir, 

*“« Tam to desire, in the Duke of Newcastle’s name as well as my own, 
that we may have the honour of meeting you and my Lord Bute at your 
house this evening a little before nine. I have in like manner sent 
notice to Lord Bute. I found the Duke of Newcastle pleased, in the 
highest degree, with your visit and conversation this forenoon.” 


The great difficulty in the way of a satisfactory settlement was the 
disposal of the Great Seal. The Duke of Newcastle was naturally 
eager to see Lord Hardwicke again Chancellor, that he might have his 
powerful support in that office, and Lord Hardwicke, himself professing 
to be tired of public life, would not have been unwilling to have re- 
sumed his labours, with the prospect now opening of a powerful go- 
vernment. ‘They felt their way by at first proposing that he should 
have a seat in the cabinet, but conditions were annexed even te this 
concession, which showed the main object to be utterly impracticable. 
The fact was, that ‘ the Great Commoner” and the Ex-premier, in the 
midst of much politeness and courtesy, thoroughly knew each other. 
The former determined to have all the power in his own hands, that he 
might pursue unchecked his vast plans for the nation’s pre-eminence 
and glory,—while he was willing to throw to others all jobbing patron- 
age, he could not bear the thought of seeing in high office, a man of 
character and weight, who from ancient associations, would be disposed 
to stand by the sordid and meddling Duke.—Lord Hardwicke behaved 
exceedingly well upon this occasion. He did not allow his disappoint- 
ment to be known to the world, and although he plainly saw that he 
could gain nothing for himself,—out of regard to his old patron, and 
(let us believe) out of regard to his country, then in imminent peril, he 
exerted himself to smooth away all difficulties. On the 22d of June thus 
he writes to Mr, Pitt :— 


134 - REIGN OF GEORGE II. 


** Since I had the honour of seeing you last, I have talked, by way of 
sounding, in the best manner I could, to all the three persons who can 
now come under consideration in the disposition of the Great Seal. | 
think I see clearly the way of thinking and inclination of them all, 
which differs very little from the conjectures which we had formed con- 
cerning them, It is now so late, that if I should have any chance of 
finding you at home, I should only put you in danger of being out of 
time for the levee... .. [ am very desirous that we should meet this 
evening, for precious moments are lost, and not innocently wasted, but 
to the detriment of that great and useful system which we are labouring 
to establish. I am most sincere and zealous in my endeavours to bring 
about what you so much wish for, a present arrangement of the Great 
Seal ; but I see vast difficulties attending it.” 

Willes, the Chief Justice of the Common Pleas, and now first Com- 
missioner of the Great Seal,—a good lawyer, and no politician,—was 
expected for some time to be the successful candidate, but he haggled 
for a peerage, to which the King would not consent. A charge of 
treachery towards Willes in this affair has been brought against Lord 
Hardwicke, but it is not supported by any evidence, nor, as he had 
given up all thoughts of the Great Seal himself, by any probability.* 
At last Pitt fixed upon a man who could not be formidable to him, who 
was ready to accept the office on very moderate terms, and who might 
be expected to perform decently well its judicial duties,—Sir Robert 
Henley, the Attorney-General,—and urged that his appointment was a 
stipulation that had been made by Leicester House to reward a man 
who had long and faithfully adhered to that party. 

The following letter from Lord Hardwicke to Mr, Pitt throws ‘great 
light on these intrigues :— 


“ Powis House, June 25, 1757, Saturday night. 
“ Dear Sir, 

However improper fora private man, yet majora effugiens opprobria 
culpe@, | did, in compliance with your commands, and those of our other 
friends who met on Thursday night, attend the King to-day, in order to 
know if he had any orders for me relating to the disposition of the Great 
Seal. I found his Majesty very grave and thoughtful on the news which 
came last night, but calm. He soon entered into matter ; and it is un- 
necessary, as well as hardly possible, to give you the detail of my au- 
dience in writing. His Majesty expressed his desire to settle his admi- 
nistration on the plan fixed, but thought there was no necessity of mak- 
ing a hasty disposition of so important an office as the Great Seal, an 
immediate part of it. However, the result was, that he absolutely re- 
fused to give a peerage with it,t which, | think, puts my Lord Chief 
Justice Willes out of the case; for his Lordship not only told me before 


* See Cooksey, 82; and Life of Lord Northington, post. 

+ Defeat of the King of Prussia at Kolin. 

t I suspect that Lord Hardwicke did not much combat this resolution, still wishing 
to have no more law Lords in the House. 


LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE. 135 


but has since repeated, that peerage is with him a condition szve qua 
non. I see the King inclines more to Mr, Attorney-General ; and when 
I stated to his Majesty what collected or conjectured to be his views, he 
hearkened, and at last bade me talk to Sir Robert Henley, reduce his 
terms as low as | could, and bring them to him in writing on Monday, 

‘‘ Since I saw my Lord Chief Justice Willes, I have seen Sir Robert 
Henley, who talks very reasonably and honourably. His proposals 
are :—First, a reversionary grant of the office of one of the tellers of 
the Exchequer to his son for life; second, a pension of 15002. per an- 
num on the Irish establishment to himself for life, to commence and 
become payable upon his being removed from the office of Lord Keeper, 
and not before, but to be determinable and absolutely void upon the 
office of teller coming into possession to his son. My present opinion 
is, that the King may be induced to agree to this on Monday ; for when 
I hinted in my discourse at a pension upon Ireland, though his Majesty 
treated it pretty severely at first, yet when I stated the several contin- 
gencies in Which it might in this case never become any real charge 
upon the revenue, he said of himself, that made the case different. 

‘J found to-night by my Lord Chief Justice Willes, that he is to go 
to Kensington on Monday, to get some warrants signed, and thinks that 
either the King may speak to him, or that he may say something to his 
Majesty on this subject; but Iam persuaded that will have no effect, 
unless he gives up the peerage, which [ am of opinion he never will. 

“If the affair of the Great Seal should be settled on Monday, in the 
person of Sir Robert Henley, as I conjecture it will, I see nothing that 
can distrust your beginning to kiss handson Tuesday. For God’s sake, 
sir, accelerate that, and don’t let any minutize stand in the way of so 
great and necessary a work. I long to see this scheme executed for the 
King’s honour and repose, the harmony of his royal family, and the 
stability of his government. I have laboured in it zealously and disin- 
terestedly, though without any pretence to such a degree of merit as 
your politeness and partiality ascribes to me. I see, with you, that at- 
tempts are flying about to tarnish it; but if it is forthwith executed on 
this foot, those will all be dissipated in the region of vanity, and instead 
of a mutelated, enfeebled, hailf-formed system, I am persuaded it will 
come outa complete, strong, and well-cemented one, to which your 
wisdom, temper, and perfect union with the Duke of Newcastle, will 
give durableness. In all events, I shall ever retain the most lively im- 
pressions of your great candour and obliging behaviour towards me, 
and continue to be, with the utmost respect, 

“ Dear Sir, 
‘Your most obedient and 
‘¢ Most humble Servant, 
“ FARDWICKE.” 


From the same quarter conciliatory advice was likewise given to the 
Duke of Newcastle, and Mr. Pitt’s famous administration was formed, 
which carried so high the renown of the English name ; but in which [ 


136 REIGN OF GEORGE IL 


cannot boast that the lawyers played any very distinguished part. 
Lord Hardwicke had nominally a seat in the Cabinet, but he seems to 
have been very little consulted by the autocratic prime minister. 

Though now without the chance of office except through some very 

remote contingency, he still attended regularly in the 
[a. p. 1757.] Hote 4ifzTicrdarenaal) i. seaeey h 
ouse of Lords. opposition ceasing, insomuc 
that, for a whole session together, there was not a single division and 
hardly a debate, the hearing of appeals and writs of error was his chief 
labour. 

Occasionally he was called upon to deliver his opinion upon measures 
concerning the administration of justice. In the session of 1758 there 
were various discussions in which he took the principal share, upon a 
bill to amend the Habeas Corpus Act, by authorizing a single Judge in 
all cases to issue a writ of habeas corpus in vacation, and by allowing 
the truth of the return to be controverted by affidavit. Conceding the 
defective state of the law, he opposed the bill as ill-framed, and, on 
his motion, certain questions were referred to the Judges, with instruc- 
tions to prepare another bill to be submitted to the House at the com- 
mencement of the following session of Parliament.t 1 am sorry to say 
that, when the next session arrived, nothing was thought of except the 
taking of Quebec, and the subject was not again resumed till the very 
close of the reign of George III., when Serjeant Onslow’s Act passed, 
most materially advancing the remedy by Habeas Corpus for the pro- 
tection of personal liberty, the great glory of English jurisprudence.t 

In praising Lord Hardwicke as an Ex-chancellor, a deduction should 
be made in respect of his having done so little to improve the laws and 
institutions of the country, when he had abundant leisure to prepare 
measures for this purpose, and one would have supposed sufficient influ- 
ence to carry them through. From his long experience at the bar and 
as a Judge in courts of law and equity, many points must have pre- 
sented themselves to him, wanting “ the amending hand.” His own 
emoluments no longer in any degree depended upon the continuation of 
abuses, and he might surely have discovered some which might have 
been corrected without materially affecting the offices and reversions 
held by his family. Yet he suffered six years of health and mental 
vigour allotted to him after his resignation to pass away unmarked by a 
single attempt to extend his fame as a legislator. It is possible that he 
could get no one to second him effectually, and that if he had carried 
very useful bills through the House of which he was a member, they 
would have been neglected or thrown out “elsewhere.” For several 


* As soon as Lord Hardwicke resigned the Great Seal, a commission appointed 
Lord Sandys Speaker of the House of Lords; and he acted in this capacity from 2d 
December, 1756, till 4th July, 1757, when Sir Robert Henley took his place on the 
woolsack as Lord Keeper.—JLords’ Journals. 

+15 St. Tr. 897-923, 

t Stat. 56 Geo. 3, c. 100. ; 

§I can say, of my own knowledge, that this state of things has since actually ex- 
isted. At different periods of our history, it has been very difficult to draw the 


rma of the representatives of the people to measures for the amendment of the 
aw. y 


LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE. 187 


sessions Parliament only met to vote thanks and supplies, and the whole 
of the proceedings of the two Houses as reported, from the King’s open- 
ing to his proroguing speech, would not fill more than a few columns of 
a modern newspaper. 

I can find no farther trace of Lord Hardwicke for the rest of this 
reign, During the warlike triumphs which now dazzled the nation, he 
seems almost completely to have sunk from public notice, and it was 
hardly known that he had a seat in the cabinet. Indeed, unless when it 
happened that those who had favours to ask of the government were 
obliged to lock to the Duke of Newcastle as the head of the Treasury, 
Mr, Pitt was regarded at home and abroad as the sole minister of the 
Crown, George II., though advanced in years, retained his health 
and his strength, and the existing state of affairs seemed likely to have 
a long continuance ; but his sudden death brought about a party revolu- 
tion, and soon placed all power in the hands of the Tories—who had 
been nearly banished from Court since the accession of the House of 
Brunswick, 





CHAPTER CXXXVII. 
CONCLUSION OF THE LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE. 


As soon as Lord Hardwicke heard of the decease of George II., he 
hurried to Carlton House, where the new Sovereign os 
was to hold his first council. Here he was re-sworn Faas het pk 
a privy councillor, and was treated with the consideration due to his 
age and his services. 

He must soon have seen the rising influence of Lord Bute; but till 
the quarrel between the favourite and the Duke of Newcastle, he rather 
showed a disposition to conform to the new régime. 

When Parliament assembled, a royal messave being delivered, recom- 
mending that the Judges should not be removable ona 
demise of the Crown, he moved the address of thanks, Pee 21s! 
and he delivered a very courtly speech most extravagantly over-praising 
that measure, and creating the delusion which still prevails that till then 
the Judges held during pleasure. In truth, by the Act of Settlement,* 
their commissions were ‘“ guamdiu se bene gesserint ;” and although, 


* 12 & 13 Will. 3, c.2. The opinion of that great and upright magistrate, Sir 
Michael Foster, was clear, that after the Judges were required by the legislature to 
be appointed “ during good behaviour,” and it was provided that they should only 
be removable on the joint address of the two Houses of Parliament, they could not 
be removed on a demise of the Crown. “I think the last precedent was a precipi- 
tate proceeding, against the plain scope and intent of the Act of Settlement, and de- 
rogatory to the honour, dignity, and constitutional independence of the Judges, and 
of the Crown itself. I found myself only on the Act of Settlement, and the reason of 
things.” Sir Michael Foster to Lord Chief Justice Wilmot, Life of Wilmot, 31. 


138 REIGN OF GEORGE II. 


by a misconstruction of that act contrary to the maxim that “the King 
never dies,” the appointment was held only during the natural life of the 
reigning sovereign, only one Judge was removed on the death of George 
I., not one on the death of George II., and no minister at any time coming 
would have ventured to remove a competent Judge on the commencement 
ofa new reign. At any rate, this boon from his Majesty was entirely at 
the expense of his successor. Nevertheless, Lord Hardwicke repre- 
sented the measure as of infinite importance to the impartial administra- 
tion of justice, and to the rights and liberties of the people. ‘ For 
doing this,” said he, “his Majesty has laid his reasons before you. 
They are such as might have become, as they are truly worthy the 
most renowned legislators of antiquity.” After praising our judicial 
system, subject to the capital defect that guamdiu se bene gesserit 
means ‘during the natural life of the King,” he proceeds :—“ This, 
which is the only defect remaining, his Majesty voluntarily and of his 
mere motion invites you to cure. Reflect upon the histories of former 
limes—with what difficulties such acts have been obtained, I was going 
to say extorted, from the crown by your ancestors—after many struggles 
—sometimes after more than one negative from the throne. Accept it 
now with thanks. Every one of your Lordships feel that gratitude in 
your own breasts which [ have imperfectly attempted to express in the 

address which I have now the honour to propose for your adoption.”* 
Lord Hardwicke continued steadily to support the government even 
afier the resignation of Mr, Pitt, when being overruled 

[Ocr. 1761.] . ee ahora y ee © 

in the Cabinet respecting a declaration of war against 
Spain, that haughty minister refused ‘ to be responsible for measures 
he was no longer allowed to guide ;” but the Earl of Bute, who would 
now bear no rival near the throne, and was impatient himself to be at 
the head of the treasury, that he might have all patronage as well as 
power in his own,hands, having forced out the Duke of Newcastle, the 
[Jan. 1762.] ease Cele suddenly.saw things in a very different 
ight, and was of opinion that the policy of the new 
minister was about to tarnish and render unavailing all the victories 
won by his predecessor. This changed state of mind was produced by 
a letter from the Duke, giving an account of an interview with Bute, in 
which his grace had threatened, as he had often before effectwally done, 
to resign unless some job were conceded to him, and in which, to his 
great mortification, he had been taken at his word. Thus piteously 
complained the ousted place-man to his confidant. ‘‘ He answered me 
drily that if I resigned, the peace might be retarded, but he never 
requested me to continue in office, nor said a civil thing to me afterwards 
while we remained together.”+ Newcastle felt so wretched out of place, 


*15 Parl. Hist. 1011, where will be seen the notes still extant in Lord Hard. 
wicke’s handwriting, which show that he continued the practice of writing out his 
speeches, almost at full length, before he delivered them.—With regard to this capi- 
tal improvement, if he thought it of such importance, he might have explained why 
he did not himself propose it during the preceding reign. 

+ Duke of Newcastle to Lord Hardwicke, May, 1762. Adolph. i. 69. The os- 
tensible dispute was about continuing the subsidy to the King of Prussia. 


LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE. 139 


that a few weeks after he opened a negotiation for his return, upon the 
basis that he should freely renounce the ‘Treasury, and be contented 
with the Privy Seal—an office without patronage—so that, at the same 
time, his friend the Earl of Hardwicke might be made President of the 
Council. Such was his borough interest that Lord Bute listened to the 
proposal, till upon consulting with the Secretary to the Treasury, and 
examining the probable votes in both Houses, it was thought the ap- 
proaching treaty of peace was sure to be approved of by large ma- 
jorities. Being finally thrown aside, the Duke went headlong into 
opposition, took part with Mr, Pitt, caballed in the city, anticipated 
nothing but disgrace from the pending negotiation with France, and re- 
solved to storm the Treasury. Lord Hardwicke, as far as was con- 
sistent with the decorum of his own character, vigorously assisted him 
in this enterprise. 

Parliament meeting on the 25th of November, the preliminary 
articles of peace, concluded at Fontainebleau on the 3d of the same 
month, were laid before both Houses, and on the 9th of December were 
debated in the House of Lords.* After rhetorical orations from the 
mover and seconder of an address of thanks to his Majesty, Lord Bute 
spoke with much more than his usual ability, entering at length into 
the whole course of the negotiations for peace, dwelling upon the terms 
that had been offered by Mr. Pitt, and contending that those actually 
concluded were, under all the circumstances, as favourable, and ought 
to be considered satisfactory by the country. He was answered by 
Lord Hardwicke in a speech which, considering the difficulties of his 
situation, displays great talent and dexterity. The criticisms on the 
several articles have ceased to be interesting, the public, without minute 
inquiry, having acquiesced in the conclusion, that the peace was nota bad 
one, although, if hostilities had been commenced at the proper time 
against Spain, the house of Bourbon might have been more effectually 
humbled, and might have been disabled from taking part against us in 
our impending disputes with our colonies, I shall, therefore, give only 
a few extracts from his speech which touch on more general topics : ‘I 
was in hopes that, after so successful a war, and particularly the great 
advantages gained over the enemy during the present year, a plan of 


* It may be amusing to present to the reader a specimen of the parliamentary 
reporting of that day. ‘This debate in the Lords being one of the most important 
and interesting which ever took place in that house, the following is the fullest ac. 
count of it published in any journal or periodical work :—“ The preliminary articles 
being read, Lord Wycombe moved an address of thanks to his Majesty. Many ob- 
jections were made, and some severe reflections thrown out against the Earl of 
Bute, with appearances of heat and animosity. That nobleman defended his own 
conduct, with temper and decorum, in a well-connected speech, delivered with great 
propriety, to the surprise of many, who did not think him so well qualified in the 
art of elocution. He gave a detail of the negotiation, and not only avowed himself 
a warm promoter of the peace, but even expressed a desire that his having contri- 
buted to the cessation of hostilities should be engraved on his tomb. He was 
seconded by the Earl of Halifax, and supported by a great majority.”—15 Parl. Hist. 
1252. Fortunately we have a sketch of the debate in the handwriting of Lord 
Hardwicke, which I have made use of. 


140 REIGN OF GEORGE II. 


peace would have been produced which would have been satisfactory to 
all lovers of their country ; but rashness and precipitation have marked 
the negotiation on our part; we have proclaimed that we would have 
peace at any price or sacrifice ; our opponents were made aware that 
this object was necessary to the party now in power, and the result can 
only give pleasure to those who regret our victories and envy our 
greatness. ‘There is one part of the address in which I can most heartily 
concur—the dutiful professions and assurances given to his Majesty. 
Convinced, from the bottom of my heart, that no prince ever ascended 
the throne with more virtuous and public-spirited disposition, with 
greater love for his people and zeal for their happiness, with greater 
purity of mind and uprightness of heart, untainted even with a wish for 
any hurtful power, nay, filled with a detestation of it.’ He was most 
successful in his complaint of the preliminary articles being laid before 
Parliament, that an opinion might be asked upon them; whereas, he 
contended, that, according to precedent and constitutional propriety, the 
Crown ought to act upon the responsibility of its ministers till a 
definitive treaty of peace is concluded. ‘Is the Parliament,” he said, 
“to judge of these preliminaries, article by article, and to propose 
variations and additions? God forbid! ’Tis the prerogative of the 
Crown to make war and peace, ‘The ministers of the Crown are to act 
in such matters at their peril. But in this instance the Crown has not 
yet executed that prerogative. No definitive treaty is made,—conse- 
quently no peace is made. We have only the heads, minutes, or notes, 
of a proposed arrangement between the two nations, by which neither 
party is bound. In this state of things Parliament ought not to be 
called upon to interpose. It may be said that the strong approbation 
and applause which ministers ask by this address will strengthen their 
hands in making the definitive treaty. But I assert the direct contrary. 
I do not say so affectedly,and to maintain the proposition of a day ; but I 
am really and seriously of opinion, that by this course of proceeding 
you disable them from doing that right to the King and to the nation 
for which, I make no doubt, they are solicitous. All Courts know that 
an English ministry treats with them under the inspection and animad- 
version of Parliament. This is a shield of defence to our negotiators 
against many demands,—a weapon in their hands to enforce others. If 
they are able to say, ‘ We cannot do this or that ; the Parliament will 
not support us,’ a power that wants a peace from you, which is now 
the case. of France, will give submissive attention to that argument. 
Many material stipulations require to be ascertained, explained, extended, 
added, or altered, before these preliminaries assume the form of a 
national compact. But if Parliament sanctions all in the gross, can you 
expect to succeed in any point which you have to make? It will be 
well known on the other side of the Channel, that Parliament cannot 
retract its approbation without stultifying itself, and without upsetting 
the administration, The noble and skilful person at present his Majesty’s 
ambassador at Paris,* when any difference now arises, will talk to the 


* The Duke of Bedford. 


LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE. 141 


winds. The French minister will laugh in your face, and tell you that 
‘you are not in earnest, for Parliament has approved of these articles ; 
you must rest contented with them as they now stand, and with our 
interpretation of them,’ ” 

Lord Granville, who had chiefly directed the negotiation, and was 
expected to take the lead in defending the preliminaries, was recently 
dead, and there was no one to answer these arguments; but whether 
they influenced any noble Lord’s opinion, it was quite certain that they 
would influence no vote, and Lord Hardwicke found himself so weak in 
numbers that he did not venture to divide the House, or even to enter 
upon the Journals a protest against the address.* No [Fep. 10, 1763.] 
material inconvenience arose in this case from the 
parliamentary discussion of the preliminaries; the definitive treaty of Paris 
having been satisfactorily concluded on the footing of them, and, not- 
withstanding Lord Hardwicke’s objections, the same course of proceed- 
ings has since been adopted on similar occasions. Indeed, he was guilty of 
a fallacy in representing a preliminary treaty of peace as a mere projet 
from which either side may draw back, for it terminates hostilities, and 
by the law of nations, as far as it goes, it is binding on the parties, 
although there be certain points between them which remain to be ad- 
justed. 

I discover no trace of any debate in the House of Lords on the De- 
finitive Treaty, and the only other speech which we know of Lord 
Hardwicke having delivered there, was on the 28th day of March, 
1763, against the very obnoxious bill for levying a duty on cider in the 
hands of the maker. We have here again a.proof of his indefatigable 
industry on all occasions which (be it ever remembered) was the great 
cause of his extraordinary success in life. There areextant in his own 
handwriting, notes fora very elaborate phzlippic against this tax. I shall 
give a few extracts, which I think are more interesting than a finished 
orailon :— 

“Shall go upon two great lines of this bill: 


1, I look upon it as an extension and application of the excise laws to improper 
objects. 


2. IL look upon it as an additional land-tax upon the cider counties. 


First Point. 


All former laws; the plan of the Excise—confined to some particular trades or 
occupations.—Do not extend to any subject who may happen to do a particular act 
in the course of his family affairs. 

Such persons give their names ;—voluntarily subject themselves to such laws as 
are or shall be, &c. 

Such dealers have shops, warehouses, outhouses, &c,, distinct. 

In this case every person who makes any quantity of cider above, &c., is sub- 
jected. 

This arises from laying the tax upon the maker, and not on the first buyer or re- 
tailer; and in this the present bill departs from the principle on which excises were 
admitted, &c.”’t 





* In the other house, after Mr. Pitt’s famous sitting speech of three hours and a 
half, although he was obliged to go away from illness, the opponents of the peace 
were more adventurous ; but they could only muster 65 against 319. 

+ Lord Hardwicke seems to have furnished one of the topics for the celebrated 


142 REIGN OF GEORGE IIL. 


He still goes on with his first point at considerably greater length, 
and then takes up the second of ‘the land tax on the cider counties,” 
with equal minuteness, bringing forward statistical facts, and trying to 
show on principle, that such taxes fall upon the producer—not upon the 
consumer. We can only judge of the actual speech by the effect it 
produced, for it was attacked by the heavy artillery of Lord Bute. He 
rose to reply, and his delivery on this occasion was so particularly slow 
and solemn that Charles Townsend, standing on the steps of the throne, 
called out in an audible whisper, “ menute guns/”* ‘These might be 
considered as announcing the funeral of Lord Bute’s ministry. The 
cider bill passed, but it added so much to the unpopularity accumulated 
upon him, and upon his countrymen, by the dismissal of Mr. Pitt, by 
the inglorious peace, by the royal favouritism on which his administration 
rested, by Churchill’s ** Prophecy of Famine,” by Wilkes’s “ Dedication 
to the new edition of the Fall of Mortimer,” and by the same unscru- 
pulous writer’s ‘ North Briton,” which had now reached the fortieth 
number, that the premier suddenly resigned, and was succeeded by 
George Grenville. The nation believed that he long continued secretly 
to direct all the measures of the Court. This suspicion was carried to 
an extravagant length; but, although he pretended 'that, having gained 
all the objects of his ambition, he had betaken himself to “ the domestic 
and literary retirement which he loved,” there can be no doubt that, for 
a considerable time, in ministerial arrangements, he chiefly guided the 
King; and that he entertained astrong hope of being able ostensibly to 
resume his position, when the prejudices excited against him should 
have passed away. 

Parliament was hurriedly prorogued to prevent discussion; but the 

[Aprit 19.] closing | speech called forth No, 45, of the ‘ North 
v ~ “4 Briton ,” general warrants were issued by Lord Halifax, 
Secretary of State, to arrest the author, printer, and publisber,— Wilkes 
was arrested,— Wilkes was sent to the Tower,—Wilkes was liberated 
by the judgment of the Court of Common Pleas; and the cry of * 
** Witkes anp. Liserty !” resounded throughout the realm. Although 
he afterwards asserted that he himself had never been much of a Wilkite, 
the administration was more unpopular than when Lord Bute was at 
the head of the Treasury ; and the sudden death of the Earl of Egre- 
mont, having deprived it of the minister whose abilities and influence 


, No. 45 of the North Briton, published soon after,—which, com- 
[Arnis 23,1763.) menting on the King’s oe recommending a “ spirit of con- 
cord,’”’—thus inveighs against the cider tax: “Is the spirit of concord to go hand 
in hand with the peace and excise through this nation? Is it to be expected be- 
tween an insolent exciseman and a peer, gentleman, freeholder, or farmer, whose 
private houses are now made liable to be entered and searched at pleasure ? Glou- 
cestershire, Herefordshire, and in general all the cider counties, are not surely the 
several counties which are alluded to in the speech. The spirit ‘of concord has not 
gone forth among them, but the spirit of liberty has, and a noble opposition has 
been given to the wicked instruments of oppression.” 

* Charles was very impartial between him and the Duke of Newcastle, who were 
both his near relations, saying, “ Silly fellow, silly fellow! TI think it is as well to 
be governe | by iny uncle with the blie riband, or my cousin with a green one.” 


LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE. 143 


had given it most weight, Lord Bute became sensible that some new 
arrangement was necessary, and opened negotiations with Mr, Pitt, the 
Duke of Newcastle, and Lord Hardwicke. A very interesting account 
of these is given in the following letter from the Ex-chancellor to his 
eldest son, which shows that he had greatly improved in the facility and 
elegance of his English composition since he wrote “ Puttip Home- 
BRED” for the ‘ Spectator ;” and that if he had practised letter-writing, 
he might have rivalled Horace Walpole : 


** Wimple, Sept. 4, 1763. 
‘¢ My dear Lord,* 

«‘T have heard the whole from the Duke of Newcastle ; and, on 
Friday morning, de source, from Mr, Pitt. Butif I was to attempt to 
relate in writing all that I have heard in two conversations of two hours 
each, the dotterells and wheatears would stink before | could finish my 
letter. Besides, it is as strange as it is long, for I believe it is the most 
extraordinary transaction that ever happened in any court in Europe, 
even in times so extraordinary as the present. 

‘“‘T will begin as the affair has gone on, preposterously, by telling 
you, that it is all over for the present, and we are to come back re 27- 
fectd. 

‘“‘ Tt began as to the substance, by a message from my Lord Bute to 
Mr, Pitt, at Hayes, through my Lord Mayor, to give him the meeting 
privately at some third place. This, his Lordship (Lord B.) afterwards 
altered by a note from himself, saying, that as he did things openly, be 
would come to Mr. Pitt’s house in Jermyn Street in broad daylight. 
They met accordingly, and Lord Bute, after the first compliments, 
frankly acknowledged that his ministry could not go on, and that the 
King was convinced of it ; and therefore he (Lord B ) desired Mr. Pitt 
would open himself frankly, and at large, and tell him his ideas or 
things and persons with the utmost freedom, After much excuse and 
hanging back, Mr, Pitt did so, with the utmost freedom indeed, though 
with civility. Here I must leave a long blank to be filled up when I 
see you. Lord Bute heard with great attention and patience ; entered 
into no defence ; but at last said, ‘If these are your opinions, why should 
you not tell them to the King himself, who will not be unwilling to hear 
you?’ How can I presume to go to the King, who am not of the 
council, nor in his service, and have no pretence to ask an audience? 
The presumption would be too great.’—‘ But suppose his Majesty should 
order you to attend him, I presume, sir, you would not refuse it..— 
‘The King’s command would make it my duty, and [ should certainly 
obey it.’ 


* I can only regret that he does not begin “ My dear Phil.” This mylording of 
his own son, which would not have been practised by a Howard or a Spencer, con- 
firms the charge against him that he preposterously piqued himself upon his nobi- 
lity, and forces us to recollect the poor youth, who, under his mistress’s stern orders, 
brought home cabbages from the greengrocer’s, and oysters from the fishmonger’s. 
According to a well-known story, the late Lord Althorp, when a distinguished 
senator, was thus addressed by his noble father : “ Ring the bell, Jack.” 


144 REIGN OF GEORGE II. 


‘*¢ This was on last Thursday sevennight. On the next day (Friday) 
Mr. Pitt received from the King an open note, unsealed, requiring him 
to attend his Majesty on Saturday noon, at the Queen’s Palace, in the 
Park. In obedience hereto, Mr, Pitt went on Saturday at noonday, 
through the Mall, in his gouty chair, the boot of which (as he said him- 
self) makes it as much known as if his name was writ upon it, to the 
Queen’s Palace. He was immediately carried into the closet, received 
very graciously ; and his Majesty began in like manner as his quondam 
favourite had done, by ordering him to tell his opinion of things and 
persons at large, and with the utmost freedom; and I think, did in sub- 
stance make the like confession, that he thought his present Ministers 
could not go on. ‘The audience lasted three hours, and Mr. Pitt went 
through the whole upon both heads more fully than he had done to 
Lord Bute, but with great complaisance and douceur to the King; and 
his Majesty gave him a very gracious accueil, and heard him with great 
patience and attention. And Mr. Pitt affirms that, in general, and upon 
the most material points, he appeared by his manner and by many ex- 
pressions to be convinced. But here I must again avail myself of my 
long blank, and make only one general description ; that Mr. Pitt went 
through the infirmities of the peace ; the things necessary and hitherto 
neglected to improve and preserve it; the present state of the nation, 
both foreign and domestic; the great Whig families and persons which 
have been driven from his Majesty’s council and service, which it would 
be for his interest to restore. In doing this he repeated many names ; 
upon which his Majesty told him, there was pen, ink, and paper, and 
wished he would write them down. Mr. Pitt humbly excused himself, 
by saying, that would be too much for him to take upon him; and he 
might, upon his memory, omit some material persons, which might be 
subject to imputation. The King still said he liked to hear him, and 
bid him go on; but said, now and then, his honour must be consulted ; 
to which” Mr, Pitt answered in a very courtly manner. His Majesty 
ordered him to come again on Monday, which he did, to the same 
place and in the same public manner.” 

[Here comes in a parenthesis, that on Sunday, Mr. Pitt went to 
Claremont, and acquainted the Duke of Newcastle with the whole, fully 
persuaded from the King’s manner and behaviour that the thing would 
do; and that on Monday the outlines of the new arrangement would be 
settled. This produced the messages to the Lords, who were sent for. 
Mr, Pitt undertook to write to the Duke of Devonshire, and the Marquis 
of Rockingham, and the Duke of Newcastle to Lord Hardwicke him- 
self. 

Mes behold the catastrophe of Monday. ‘The King received him 
equally graciously ; and that audience lasted near two hours. The 
King began, that he had considered of what had been said, and talked 
still more strongly of his honour. His Majesty then mentioned Lord 
Halifax for the Treasury, still proceeding upon the supposition of a 
change. 

‘To this Mr. Pitt hesitated an objection—that certainly Lord Hali- 


LIFE OF LORD HARDWICKE. 145 
+ 

fax ought to be considered, but that he should not have thought of him 
for the Treasury. Suppose his Majesty should think fit to give him the 
Paymaster’s place. The King replied, ‘ But, Mr. Pitt, 1 had designed 
that for poor G. Grenville, he is your near relation, and you once loved 
him.’ To this the only answer made was a low bow. And now here 
comes the bait. ‘ Why,’ says his Majesty, ‘ should not my Lord Tem- 
ple have the Treasury ? you would then go on very well.’—*‘ Sir, the 
person whom you shall think fit to honour with the chief conduct of 
your affairs cannot possibly go on without a Treasury connected with 
him. But that alone will do nothing. It cannot be carried on without 
the great families who have supported the Revolution government, and 
other great persons, of whose abilities and integrity the public has had 
experience, and who have weight and credit in the nation. I should 
only deceive your Majesty, if I should leave you in an opinion that I 
could goon, and your Majesty make a solid administration on any 
other foot.’-—‘ Well, Mr. Pitt, I see (or I fear) this will not do. My 
honour is concerned, andI must support it.’?. ‘ Et sie finita est fabula,’ 
*‘ Vos valete,” but I cannot with a safe conscience add, ‘ plaudite. | 
have made my skeleton larger than I intended at first, and | hope you 
will understand it. Mr, Pitt professes himself firmly persuaded that 
my Lord Bute was sincere at first, and that the King was in earnest 
the first day; but that on the intermediate day, Sunday, some strong 
effort was made which produced the alteration. 

“Mr. Pitt likewise affirms that, if he was examined upon oath, he 
could not tell upon what this negotiation broke off, whether upon any 
particular point, or upon the general complexion of the whole; but that 
if the King shall assign any particular reason for it, he will never con- 
tradict it. 

** My story has been so long, though in truth a very short abridg- 
ment, that I shall not lengthen it by observations, but leave you to 
make your own : it will certainly be given out, that the reason was the 
unreasonable extent of Mr. Pitt’s plan—a general rout ; and the mino- 
rity, after having complained so much of proscriptions, have endea- 
voured to proscribe the majority. I asked Mr. Pitt the direct question, 
and he assured me, that he thought himself obliged to name a great 
many persons for his own exculpation, yet he did not name above 
five or six for particular places. I must tell you that one of these was 
your humble servant for the President’s place. ‘This was entirely with- 
out my authority and privity. But the King’s answer was, ‘ Why, Mr. 
Pitt, it is vacant, and ready for him; and he knows he may have it to- 
morrow, if he thinks fit,’ 

‘«‘] conjectured that this was said with regard to what had passed 
with poor Lord Egremont, which made me think it necessary to tell — 
Mr. Pitt in general what had passed with that Lord (not owning that 
his Lordship had offered it directly in the King’s name), and what I 
had answered, which he, in his way, much commended, 

‘«« This obliges me to desire that you will send me by the bearer my, 

VOL. V. 10 


146 REIGN OF GEORGE II. 


letter to you, which you were to communicate to my Lord Lyttleton, 
that | may see how I have stated it there, for | have no copy. 

“| shall now make you laugh, though some parts of what goes be- 
fore make me melancholy, to see the King so committed, and his 
Majesty submitting to it, &c. But what I mean will make you laugh, 
is, that the Ministers are so stung with this admission that they cannot 
go on, (and what has passed on this occasion will certainly make them 
less able to go on,) and with my Lord Bute’s having thus carried them 
to market in his pocket, that they say Lord Bute has attempted to sacri- 
fice them to his own fears and timidity ; that they do not depend upon 
him, and will have nothing to do with him; and [ have been credibly 
informed that both Lord Halifax and George Grenville have declared 
that he is to go beyond sea, and reside for a twelvemonth or more. 
You know a certain cardinal was twice exiled out of France, and 
governed France as absolutely whilst he was absent as when he was 
present. 

‘“* Yours affectionately, 
‘¢ HARDWICKE,” 


While the Ex-chancellor was thus speculating upon changes of ad- 
ministration, and his own return to office, he was struck with a mortal 
disorder. Hitherto he had enjoyed uninterrupted health, and such atten- 
tion had he paid to temperance and to exercise when in his power, 
that, although originally by no means of a robust constitution, he was still 
active in his body, and the hand of time had been laid so gently 
on his frame, that he seemed to be only entering into a green old age. 

Being made aware that he could not hope to recover, he submitted to the 
will of Providence with firmness, and even with cheerfulness,—gratefully 
reflecting on the long and singularly prosperous career which he 
had run. ; \ 

When Parliament again met he was unable to take part in the stormy 

discussions which arose out of the prosecution and 

[Nov. 15, 1763. ] imprisonment of Wilkes; but his faculties were still 

unimpaired, and, though confined to his bed, he could occasionally see 
and converse with his political as well as his private friends. 

A resolution being moved and carried in the House of Commons, 
‘« that privilege of Parliament does not extend to the case of writing and 
publishing seditious libels,” was sent up to the Lords, who were called 
upon to concur in it. As Mr. Wilkes had attacked Lord Bute so vio- 
lently and so successfully, he was warmly supported by the opposition, 
—and Pitt in one House and Earl Temple in the other, boldly resisted 
the resolution ;—but Lord Hardwicke, though a strong party-man to 
the last, when consulted, expressed a clear opinion “ that privilege of 
Parliament does not extend to prevent a member from being prosecuted 
and imprisoned for any crime ; that the words in the common cantelena, 
‘treason, felony, and breach of the peace,’ are only put as examples, 
and that it would be most discreditable to Parliament to assert the right 
of all its members to commit with impunity all misdemeanours which 


CHARACTER OF LORD HARDWICKE. 147 


did’ not amount to an actual breach of the peace,” TA, 

In consequence of this opinion, the Duke of New- LOK) 28441488.) 
bbe P ’ 

castle, and the peers more immediately connected with him, refused to 

vote with Lord Temple, or to join in his protest,—much to the annoy- 

ance of that nobleman. 

This was Lord Hardwicke’s last interference with politics. Finding 
that his disease made rapid progress, he deliberately settled his worldly 
affairs, and then devoted himself to preparation for the awful change 
which was at hand. Amidst ‘the most affectionate attentions of his 
family, he expired at Powis House on the 6th of March, 1764, in the 
seventy-fourth year of his age. He was buried at Wimple, where a 
monument is erected to his memory, with an inscription, which after 
stating the dates of his several promotions, thus eulogises him :— 


“The Strength and Quickness of his Parts, joined to an unwearied Application 
and Industry, recommended him, soon after his entrance inte Business, to an ex- 
tensive course of Practice, and advanced him, before the usual Age, to those Infe- 
rior Honours of the Robe, from which is opened the fairest Prospect to the Highest. 
In this Situation as an Advocate, and a Servant of the Crown, his Skill in the various 
Branches of the Law and Constitution, his Eloquence, his Integrity, his Zeal for 
Justice, and his Candour and Tenderness to the Subject, were universally acknow- 
ledged and admired. In each of the Courts where he presided, his Firmness and 
Dignity, his clear and ready Apprehension, his patient and close Attention, the 
Compass and Profoundness of his Knowledge, and the Justice of his Decisions, 
afforded the most valuable Instruction to the Profession, and the Highest Satisfac- 
tion to the Parties. His Eloquence in Parliament was natural and manly, his 
Method exact, his Reasoning powerful and persuasive, his Manner modest yet com- 
manding, his Voice clear and harmonious; and all these received a lustre and a 
force, almost irresistible, from the acknowledged Integrity of his Charaeter. When 
he advised in the more Seeret Councils of State, his superior Judgment, his Long 
Experience, his Acquaintance with History and Treaties, enabled him to state pre- 
cisely, to debate fully, and to determine wisely and usefully to the Public those 
arduous Questions which were the Subject of Deliberation. In his Political Con- 
nexions, as well as private Friendships, he was uniform and constant. In his Re- 
ligious Principles, he was attached to the National Establishment, with that Spirit 
of Moderation and Charity which becomes a sincere and enlightened Member of a 
Protestant Communion. In private Life he was distinguished by the Amiableness 
of his Manners, his engaging Address, and his general Benevolence ; ever easy: and 
cheerful in the Conversation of his Family and Friends; and retaining the Taste 
of his early Classical Studies amidst his most laborious and highest Employments. 
Thus he lived during the Exercise of his great Offices; and in his Retirement was 
honor’d and revered by the whole Nation, and distinguished by the Approbation and 
peculiar Favour of his Sovereign, till his 74th year; when a long and painfull Dis- 
order, supported by an uncommon patience, and a Strength of Mind unimpaired, put 
a Period to his Life, March the 6th, 1764.” 


These are the effusions of filial piety ; but notwithstanding his failings 
and the censure to which some parts of his conduct may be liable, he 
is certainly to be considered a very eminent and very meritorious per- 
sonage in English history. Entering public life very early, he lived 
to a great age in very interesting times, and he acted an important part 
in many of the events which distinguished the century in which he 
flourished, He had heard speeches delivered from the throne by Wil- 
liam IIT. and by George III.; he had seen the reins of government in 
the hands of Godolphin and in the hands of Pitt; he had witnessed the 


148 CHARACTER OF 


rejoicings for the victory of Blenheim and for the capture of Quebec ; 
his ears had been split with cries of ‘* Sacheverell and High Church !” 
and with cries of “ Wilkes and Liberty /” he had been acquainted with 
Bolingbroke and with Burke; he had marked the earliest burst of ad- 
miration called forth by the poetry of Pope and by the poetry of Churchill ; 
he himself had been fifty years a member of the legislature, holding a 
most distinguished station in either House of Parliament; he had filled. 
various important offices with singular ability ; he had held the highest civil 
office in the kingdom longer than any of his predecessors (one excepted), 
since the foundation of the monarchy, and with greater applause than 
any of his predecessors had ever gained or any successor could hope 
for ; he had been mainly instrumental in keeping the reigning dynasty 
on the throne, by the measures which he advised for crushing a dan- 
gerous rebellion raised to restore the legitimate line ; he was the great 
legislator for Scotland, freeing that country from the baronial tyranny by 
which it had been immemorially oppressed; in England he was the 
finisher and almost the author of the great Code of Equity to which his 
name might justly be attached; though of low degree, in his own life- 
time his blood was mingled with that of the Campbells and the Greys, 
and he established one of the most potent families in the nobility of 
Britain, Unceasing good luck attended him through life; but along 
with that luck such results required lofty aspiration, great ability, con- 
summate prudence, thorough control of temper, rigid self-denial, and un- 
wearied industry. His chief glory is, that, as a public man, he was 
ever consistent and upright. Compare him with preceding and with suc- 
ceeding Chancellors, who started by making themselves formidable as 
the ultra-zealous champions of freedom, and who rose by renouncing 
and by persecuting the principles which they professed. He was from 
boy to old man a sound Whig—loving our monarchical form of go- 
vernment, but believing that it exists for the good of the people, and that 
for the good of the people the prerogatives of the Crown are to be re- 
stricted, and are to be preserved. The heaviest charges I find brought 
against him by impartial writers, are love of money and arrogance of 
manner in common society. ‘ He was undoubtedly an excellent 
Chancellor,” says Lord Waldegrave, “and might have been thought 
a great man had he been less avaricious, less proud, less unlike a 
gentleman,”’* 

“The Stately and ceremonious reception of his visiters on a Sunday 
evening,” says Cooksey, ‘ was insipid and disgusting in the highest 
degree. Stranger as he was to the life and habits of country g gentlemen, 
he treated them with insulting inattention and hauteur. Gorse they 
from ever so great a distance, either to visit his Lordship or to see his 
place, their horses were sent for refreshment to the * Tiger,’ a vile inn 
near half a mile distant, as I have experienced more than once. He 
submitted indeed like other Lords, sometimes to entertain the xatzves, 
but with that visible and contemptuous superiority as disgusted rather 


* Mem. p. 20. 


LORD HARDWICKE. 149 


than obliged them. When in high good-humour, he had two or three 
stock stories to make his company laugh, which they were prepared and 
expected to do. One was of his bailiff Woodcock, who, having been 
ordered by his Lady to procure a sow of the breed and size she par- 
ticularly described to him, came one day into the dining-room, when 
full of great company, proclaiming, with a burst of joy he could not 
suppress, ‘ Ihave been at Royston fair, my Lady, and got a sow ex- 
actly of your Ladyship’s breed and size.’ We also used to relate an 
incident that occurred to him in a morning ride from Wimple. Observ- 
ing an elegant gentleman’s house, he conceived a wish to see the inside 
of it. It happened to be that of Mr. Montague, brother to Lord Sand- 
wich, who, being at home, very politely, without knowing his Lordship, 
conducted him about the apartments, which were perfectly elegant ; and 
expatiated on the pictures, some of which were capital. Among these 
were two female figures, beautifully painted, in all their native naked 
charms. ‘ These ladies,’ says the master of the house, ‘ yoru must 
certainly know, for they are most striking likenesses.’ On the guest’s 
expressing his perfect ignorance, ‘Why, where the devil have you led 
your life, or what company have you kept,’ says the Captain, * not to 
know Fanny Murray and Kitty Fisher, with whose persons I thought 
no fashionable man like you could be unacquainted? On my taking 
leave and saying, ‘ J should be glad to return his civilities at Wimple,’ 
what surprise and confusion did he express on his discovering he had 
been talking all this dad¢nage to Lord Hardwicke !”* 

Others have given a more favourable view of his manners, represent- 
ing that “he rose from the fatigues and anxieties of business to the en- 
joyment of the society of his family and his friends, with the spirits 
ofa person entirely vacant and disengaged, preserving in old age the 
vivacity as well as appearance of youth, and ever uniting the characters 
of dignity and amiableness.”t 

The censure of his love of money should be sofiened by the recollec- 
tion of the penury from which he had suffered in his youth, and from 
the consideration that it never exposed bim even to the suspicion of corrup- 
tion. A graver fault, and attended with less palliation, may, I think, be 
imputed to him in his abandonment of literature and literary men. It might 
have been expected that in the breast of one who had been taken to dine 
at the Kit-cat, who had acquired credit by writing a paper in the Spec- 
tator, and who had witnessed the glory shed over Lord Somers in his 
decline by continuing the protector and the associate of wits and philoso- 
phers, the sacred flame once kindled would have smouldered, ready to 
burst out when freed from the load of Chancery precedents and official 
cares. But as he advanced in life he seems to have contracted a con- 
tempt for all liberal studies, and to have valued men only according to 
their rank, their riches, and their political influence. | find no trace of 
his having the smallest intercourse or correspondence, except with law- 
yers, or the leaders of faction. He obtained a pension for Mallet (a 


* Cooksey, 101. + Life, by Chalmers. 


150 CHARACTER OF 


man doing no honour to the country of his birth) under pretence of his 
literary celebrity, but, in reality, for writing a pamphlet when the nation 
was exasperated by the ill conduct and disasters of the war, to turn the 
public resentment and vengeance from the ministry upon Admiral Byng. 
Dr. Birch, well known as a scholar and historical collector, had been 
tutor to his sons, and had dedicated the *‘ Thurloe State Papers” to the 
Lord Chancellor himself. One of his pupils, much attached to him, seeing 
him neglected and starving, thus ventured to address the great distributor 
of church patronage :—‘‘ From my own acquaintance with him I can 
only confirm the general character he bears of being a clergyman of 
great worth, industry and learning, subsisting at the mercy of book- 
sellers and printers, without any preferment but a small living in the 
country, which will scarce keep a curate. He is a person of excellent 
heart as well as head, and by his diligence and general knowledge in 
most parts of learning, may be made extremely useful to the public.” 
The reply was an offer of a living in Wales of 30/. a year which Dr. 
Birch declined accepting. Lord Hardwicke thought it his duty to dis- 
pose of ecclesiastical preferments in his gift—with a view to increase his 
own political influence,—without any scrupulous regard for the interests 
of religion and—without the slightest respect for scientific or literary 
merit.* He has had his reward. While Somers, Harcourt, and 
Murray are immortalised in the poems of Addison and Pope, Hard - 
wicke was only praised by the dul! authors of treatises on the practice 
of the Court of Chancery, or dull compilers of Chancery Reports. 
With all his titles and all his wealth, how poor is his fame in compari- 
son of that of his contemporary, Samuet Jonnson, whom he would not 
have received at his Sunday evening parties in Powis House, or invited 
to hear his stale stories at Wimple! A man desirous of solid fame 
would rather have written the ‘ Rambler,” the ‘ Vanity of Human 
Wishes,” ** Rasselas,” or ‘* the Lives of the Poets,” than have delivered 
all Lord Hardwicke’s speeches in Parliament, and all his judgments 
in the Court of Chancery, although the Author had been sometimes 
obliged to pass the night on the ashes of a glass house, and at last 
thought himself passing rich with his 3002. pension—while the Peer 
lived in splendour, and died worth a million.t 

Beyond his efforts in English prose composition, which J have already 
mentioned, | am not aware of anything from Lord Hardwicke’s pen, 
except his celebrated letter to Lord Kames. That profound jurist and 
philosopher, about to publish his treatise on ‘* Equity,” sent the ‘ Intro- 


* When he was actually going out of office, and jobbing in church preferment 
could be of no avail to him, he gave Dr. Birch a better living in the city of London, 

+ It is whimsical enough that Johnson himself for a moment wished that, instead 
of being at the head of English literature, he had been a “law Lord.” But at other 
times he showed a consciousness of his own superiority to Chancellors and Peers: 
“It is wonderful, Sir, with how little real superiority of mind men can make an 
eminent figure in public life.”'—Hardwicke is to Johnson as the most interesting 
Life that could be written of Hardwicke is to Boswell’s “ Life of Johnson,”—the 
proportion of a farthing candle to the meridian sun. 


? Bos. iv. 191. 





LORD HARDWICKE. 151 


duction,” explaining his general views on the subject in MS., to the great 
Ex-chancellor, whose fame was, if possible, higher in Scotland than in 
his own country. Lord Hardwicke’s answer is a very masterly perfor- 
mance,* and shows that he might have left some permanent monument 
of his fame to have placed him in the same category as Sir Thomas 
More, Lord Bacon, and Lord Clarendon,—great English judges, who 
enriched the literature of their country. He not only gives an admira- 
ble sketch of the origin of Equity Jurisdiction in England, but enters 
deeply into the general principles on which the essential distinction be- 
tween Law and Equity rests, and on which they are respectively to be 
administered. Unlike mere Chancery practitioners, whom favour or 
accident has elevated to high judicial office, and who, religiously per- 
suaded that Chancery practice is the perfection of human wisdom,t 
sincerely and strongly think that whatever differs from it must be ab- 
surd and mischievous,—while he contends, like Lord Bacon,t that the 
administration of law and equity should be committed not to the same 
court, as in Scotland, but to separate courts, as in England,—he libe- 
rally admits that there are partial advantages and inconveniences be- 
longing to both systems, and that there is ground for considerable diffe- 
rence of opinion upon their rival pretensions. He afterwards discusses, 
in a most luminous manner, the important question, how far in the Pra- 
torian jurisdiction the conscience of the Judge, or arbitrium, bone vire, 
is to be controlled,—and beautifully shows the advantage of general 
rules in restraining caprice as well as corruption, and in letting the world 
know how civil rights are defined and will be adjudicated. 

Lord Hardwicke has been held up by some of his injudicious flat- 
terers as a great classical scholar, and we are referred to a letter which 
he wrote in the year 1724, ‘“‘ Samugxi Cyurerico,” in which he asks the 
learned Dr, Samuel Clerk to revise an epitaph composed on one of the 
Bradford family to whom he was related by marriage in consequence of 
a request ‘*a Cocceio uxoris mez germano, tibi bene noto.”) But there 
is nothing in this letter beyond what could be accomplished by a lad 
who had been at an ordinary grammar school; and Lord Hardwicke 
must be cited as an instance of success—not in consequence of a fin- 
ished education, but in spite of a very defective one. By the anxiety 


* June 30,1759. Lord Woodhouselee’s “ Life of Lord Kames,” i. 237. 

+ Once, in a conversation I had with a very eminent counsel at the Chancery 
bar, who wore a silk gown, respecting the effect of “ notice to a purchaser of an un- 
registered deed,” I opposed his opinion by citing a decision in point of Chancellor 
d’Agesseau. ‘Ah!’ said he gravely, “ but had the French Lord Chancellor called 
in the assistance of the French Master of the Rolls?” This reminded me of the 
English tar, who, returning home from a French prison, said to his companion, 
“ Jack, what rum’ns ’em ’ere Frenchmen be! Do you know, Jack, that they call 
a horse a SHUVEL, and a hat a cuopPER ?”’ 

t * Apud nonnullos receptuin est, et jurisdictio, que decernit secundum equum 
et bonum, atque illa altera que procedit secundum jus strictum, iisdem curiis de- 
putentur ; apud alios autem, ut diversis : omnino placet curiarum separatio. Neque 
enim servabitur distinctio casuum, si fiat commixtio jurisdictionum ; sed arbitrium 
legem tandem trahet.”—De Aug. L, viii. c. 3, aph. 45. 

§ Birch’s MSS. Brit. Mus. 


152 CHARACTER OF 


with which he gave his own sons the benefit of academical discipline, 
he showed the consciousness he felt of the unequal fight he had fought 
from the want of it. 

There is extant one specimen of his poetical composition, which will 
perhaps be considered as justifying him in for ever renouncing the Muses, 
and trusting his reputation with posterity to Atk. and Ves. Sen. Lord 
Lyttleton had written a copy of verses, addressed to the Countess of 
Egremont, entitled “« Virruz and Fame,” supposed to be a Dialogue 
between these two ladies, in which Virtus, after drawing the character 
of the best of wives and mothers, concludes by setting Famu right, who 
thought this must be the wife of a country parson, 


“Who never saw the court nor town, 
Whose face is ugly as her gown. 
Tis the most celebrated toast 
That Britain’s spacious isle can boast; 
Tis princely Petworth’s noble dame ; 
Tis Egremont—go tell it, Fame.” 


Addition extempore, by Lord Chancellor Hardwicke. 


“ Fame heard with pleasure—straight replied, 
First on my roll stands Windham’s bride ; 
My trumpet oft I’ve raised to sound 
Her modest praise the world around ; 

But notes were wanting ; canst thou find 
A muse to sing her face, her mind ? 
Believe me, I can name but one, 

A friend of yours—’tis Lyttleton !” 


I am sorry that neither from print nor the tradition of Westminster 
Hall can [collect any personal anecdotes or noted sayings of Lord 
Hardwicke to enliven my dull narrative of his life.* I suspect that, 
unlike his immediate successor, studying his dignity very uniformly, 
and always very observant of decorum, he added little to the “ana” of 
his age. We must not !ook for the workings of his genius in Joe Mil- 
ler, but exclusively in the Parliamentary History and the Chancery 
Reports. 

I have now only to state that “‘ he was one of the handsomest men of 
his time, and bestowed great attention to his appearance and dress.” 
There were reports circulated of his gallantries with a Lady B , and 
with the celebrated Mrs. Wells; but for these there was as little foun- 
dation as for his conjectured intimacy with Fanny Murray and Kitty 
Fisher. He was a perfect pattern not only of temperance and sobriety, 
but also of conjugal fidelity. 





* There is one story related of him worth mentioning, which shows that he fol- 
lowed the precedent of Lord Chancellor Cowper in being civil to the House of 
Cromwell. There being a suit heard before him in which Oliver’s grandson was a 
party, while the opposite counsel was very irrelevantly and improperly inveighing 
against the memory of the Protector, the Lord Chancellor said, ‘I observe Mr. 
Cromwell standing outside the bar there inconveniently pressed by the crowd ; make 
way for him, that he may sit by me on the bench.” It is needless to add, that the 
ei i Nak of the family being so noticed, the orator felt rebuked, and changed 

Is tone. 


LORD HARDWICKE., 153 


Before proceeding to speak of his wife and his descendants, I will 
further assist the reader to come to a right judgment upon his merits and 
defects, by presenting characters of him as drawn by three eminent 
contemporaries who knew him well; the first being his greatest vitupe- 
rator, the second his most indiscriminate eulogist, and the third speaking 
of him, I think, in the words of impartiality and truth. Says Horace 
Walpole: ‘* He was a creature of the Duke of Newcastle, and by him 
introduced to Sir Robert Walpole, who contributed to his grandeur and 
baseness, in giving him an opportunity of displaying the extent of the 
latter, by raising him to the height of the former. He had good parts, 
which he laid out so entirely upon the law in the first part of his life, 
that they were of little use to him afterwards, when he would have ap- 
plied them to more general views. On his promotion he flung himself 
into politics, but, as he had no knowledge of foreign affairs but what 
was whispered to him by Newcastle, he made a poor figure. In the 
House of Lords he was laughed at,—in the cabinet despised.” 

On the other hand, he is extravagantly praised by another Honour- 
able,—Danes Barrington,—who considers him above all human failing : 
“There is not a report of a single decision of Lord Bacon ; some few 
indeed (and those unimportant ones) by Lord Nottingham ; we have 
hardly a determination of consequence by the great Lord Somers : and 
though he was succeeded by lawyers of ability and eminence, yet it 
may “be said that we owe the present beneficial and rational system of 
equity to the peculiar national felicity of the greatest lawyer and states- 
man of this, or, perhaps, any other country, having presided in this 
Court near twenty years without a single decree having been reversed, 
either in the whole or any part of it; an infallibility which, in no other 
instance, was ever the lot of humanity.”* 

The Earl of Chesterfield thus mediates between them, and pronounces 
sentence for posterity :— 

‘*¢ Lord Hardwicke was perhaps the greatest magistrate this country 
ever had. He presided in the Court of Chancery above twenty years, + 
and in all that time none of his decrees were ever reversed, or the just- 
ness of them questioned. ‘Though avarice was his ruling passion, he 
was never in the least suspected of any kind of corruption—a rare and 
meritorious instance of virtue and self-denial under the influence of such 
a craving, insatiable, and increasing passion. He was an agreeable, 
eloquent speaker in Parliament, but not without some little tincture of 
the pleader. He was a cheerful, instructive companion, humane in his 
nature, decent in his manners, unstained by any vice (avarice excepted) 
—a very great magistrate, but by no means a great minister.” 

His marriage with the young widow turned out most auspiciously, 
They continued to old age tenderly attached to each other. She con- 
tributed not only to his happiness, but to his greatness. ‘She often 
humorously laid claim (as she had good right to do) to so much of the 
merit of Lord Hardwicke’s being a good Chancellor, in that his thoughts 


* Observations on Statutes, 325. t Not quite correct. 


154 CHARACTER OF LORD HARDWICKE. 


and attention were never taken from the business of the Court by the 
private concerns of his family,—the care of which, the management of 
his money matters, the setiling all accounts with stewards and others, 
and above all, the education of his children, had been wholly her de- 
partment and concern, without any interposition of his, farther than 
implicit acquiescence and entire approbation.”* She was supposed to 
be ‘very stingy, and foolish stories were circulated to annoy her ; but 
‘* she would often smile at hearing of the cold chine being turned and 
found bare, of the potted sawdust to represent lamprey, and of the want 
of Dr. Mead’s kitchent to be added to Powis House, and only observe 
that, uncertain as was the time of Lord Chancellor’s dining, and the 
company that would attend him; yetif it should happen that he brought 
with him an ambassador or person of the highest rank, he never found 
a dinner or supper to be ashamed of.” 

We may judge of the malicious turn given to her domestic arrange- 
ments, however deserving of praise, by the charge against her of steal- 
ing the purse in which the Great Seal was kept, to make a counterpane. 
The truth is, that this purse, highly decorated with the royal arms and 
other devices,—by ancient custom, is annually renewed, and is the per- 
quisite of the Lord Chancellor for the time being, if he chooses to claim 
it. Lady Hardwicke, availing herself of this custom, caused the purse, 
with its decorations, to be put as embroidery on a large piece of rich 
crimson velvet, corresponding to the height of one of the state rooms at 
Wimple. These purses, just twenty in number, complete the hangings 
of the room, and the curtains of a bed, singularly magnificent. She 
therefore, in reality, only prepared a characteristic and proud heir-loom 
to be handed down to commemorate the founder of the family. 

Lord and Lady Hardwicke had seven children, five sons and two 
daughters, who all grew up, and flourished. Philip, the eldest son, 
married Jemima Campbell Marchioness Grey, only daughter of John 
Earl of Breadalbane, and granddaughter and heiress of the Duke of 
Kent, who obtained for her a remainder of his marquisate. This Philip, 
who became the second Earl of Hardwicke, was a man of letters, and 
an excellent politician, continuing always a steady adherent of the 
Rockingham party. Of the accomplished and high-spirited Charles, the 
second son, it will be my duty to give a separate memoir, as he held 
the Great Seal of England. Joseph, the third son, being for many 
years ambassador to the States. General, was raised to the peerage by 
the title.of Lord Dover. John, the fourth son, was not inferior in learn- 
ing or abilities to any of his brothers, but preferred a private station 
with the enjoyment of several lucrative sinecures conferred upon him 
by his father. James, the youngest son, was made Bishop of Ely. The 
eldest daughter, having become Lady Anson, and the youngest Lady 
Heathcote, are said to have been distinguished ornaments of the court 


* Cooksey, 34; ib. 40. 

+ “ Oft would he go when summer suns prevail, 
To taste the coolness of his kitchen’s gale.” 

1 Cooksey, 39. 


LIFE OF LORD NORTHINGTON. 155 


of George II. The Chancellor is now worthily represented by his 
great-grandson, the present gallant Earl of Hardwicke.* 


(CHAPTER CXXXVIII. 


LIFE OF LORD CHANCELLOR NORTHINGTON FROM HIS BIRTH TILL HE 
RECEIVED THE GREAT SEAL, 


My next Chancellor [ cannot place in the first rank as a lawyer or 
a statesman; but he is not despicable in either capacity, and he is a 
memorable personage in the history of the Great Seal, as he held it 
nine years, in two reigus,t and during the whole of four administra- 
tions,—the last of which he overturned.t 

Robert Henley (afterwards Lord Keeper, Lord Chancellor, Baron 
Henley, and Earl of Northington), was descended from the ancient 
family of “* Henley of that ilk,” in Somersetshire.§ In 1660, the elder 
branch was advanced to the dignity of the baronetage. Before then, a 
cadet following the law as a profession, had filled the lucrative situa- 
tion of ** Master of the Court of King’s Bench on the Plea Side,”—from 
the profits of which he left his family a landed estate of 8000/, a year. 
He acquired the Grange in Hampshire, which when afterwards in the 
possession of his descendant, Horace Walpole speaks of with so much 
admiration, ‘The house was built for the worthy taxer of costs, when 
he had become Sir Robert Henley, Knight, by Inigo Jones—presenting 
a hall and staircase which the world was called upon to admire as 
‘* beautiful models of the purest and most classic antiquity.””|| 

His son Robert sat in Parliament for the borough of Andover, without 
acquiring much distinction ; but the name of his grandson, Anthony, 
one of the politest and most accomplished men of his day, frequently 
occurs in the memoirs and correspondence of the reign of Queen Annie. 

Having distinguished himself at Oxford by an early relish for litera- 


* Grandeur of the law, p. 66. +t George II. George III. 

t Mr. Pitt’s, Lord Bute’s, Duke of Bedford’s, Marquis of Rockingham’s. 

§ 1. e. Taking their surname from the name of a territorial possession belonging 
to them, when surnames first began. Our surnames are chiefly derived from this 
origin, or from personal peculiarities,—from trades and employments, or from the 
Christian name of the father or mother. Of these, the first class is the most aris- 
tocratic, denoting a descent from an ancient baron, or, at least, the Lord of a manor. 

|| Lord Henley says, ‘ The critic, however, was, I suspect, misled by the respect 
due to the name of Jones. The current testimony of all who remember it as it then 
was, represents it, notwithstanding the merit of individual parts, as, upon the whole, 
a heavy and gloomy structure, utterly unworthy of the great architect.”—Life of 
Lord Northington, p. 5. It is related, that Lord Chancellor Northington, expecting 
a visit here from George III, and Queen Charlotte, cautioned his daughters against 
telling their Majesties that the house had been built by “ Inpico Jones.” 

“The Grange was sold by the second Earl of Northington to Mr. Drummond, and 
is now the property of Lord Ashburton. But the house has been rebuilt in a most 
sumptuous style, and not,a vestige of the original structure remains. 


156 LIFE OF 


ture, and the great refinement and elegAnce of his manners, on removing 
to London he was admitted into the society and friendship of the first 
wits of the time. He was intimate with the Earls of Dorset and Sun- 
derland, and with Swift, Pope, and Arbuthnot. ‘It was thought 
strange,” says his biographer, ‘ as every one knew what a secret influ- 
ence he had on the affairs in King William’s Court, that he who had a 
genius for anything great as well as anything gay, did not rise in the 
state, where he would have shone as a politician no less than he did at 
Will’s and Tom’s as a wit. But the Muses and pleasantry had engaged 
him. He had something of the character of Tibullus, and, except his 
extravagance, was possessed of all his other qualities—his indolence, 
his gallantry, his wit, his humanity, his generosity, his learning, his 
taste for letters. There was hardly acontemporary author that did not 
experience his bounty.”* Garth’s “ Dispensary” was dedicated to him, 
and some even ascribed to him the authorship of that poem.f He 
certainly was a contributor to the “ Tatler.” He first served in the 
House of Commons for Andover, and afterwards till his death for Wey- 
mouth and Melcombe Regis. He was a strong Whig, and on one 
occasion came prominently forward as mover of the address to Queen 
Anne, “ that she would confer some dignity in the church upon Hoadly 
as a reward for asserting and vindicating the principles of the Revolu- 
tion.” This made him so odious to the Tory administration, which 
bore sway for the last four years of Anne’s reign, that they made a 
great effort to deprive him of his seat, first at the election, and then on 
a petition, but without effect. He married Mary, daughter and co- 
heiress of the Honourable Peregrine Bertie, second son of Montague 
Earl of Lindsey, with whom he received a considerable fortune. 
They had three sons. Anthony, the eldest, who inherited and for time 
enjoyed the family estate; Birtie, the youngest, who went into the 
church, and Rogert, the subject of this memoir, who was born in the 
year 1708.t 

I find no anecdotes of the future Chancellor’s childhood, or omens 
to foretell his coming greatness. Indeed, he was pretty well stricken in 
years before either he himself or others imagined that there would be 
anything to distinguish him from the ordinary race of mortals who 
form the chorus in the play of life—without ever fretting or strutting 
a single hour upon the stage. He was educated at Westminster school. 


* Memoirs of Persons who died in 1711. 8vo, 1712. 

+ There is not much resemblance of character between the father and the son, if 
there was any truth in the language of this Dedication : “ A man of your character 
can no more prevent a dedication than he would encourage one; for merit, like a 
virgin’s blushes, is still most discovered when it labours most to be concealed. 
Rather than violate your modesty, I must be wanting to your other virtues; and to 
gratify one good quality, do wrong to a thousand.” The Chancellor, through life, 
was more remarkable for his brass, than for his blushes. 

t The most distinguished man of the name, before our hero, was orator Henley, 
celebrated by Pope. He claimed to be related to the ancient race I have been men- 
tioning ; and they would probably have admitted the claim, if he had gained his 
notoriety as a General or a Judge, 


LORD NORTHINGTON. 157 
¢ 


There he formed an acquaintance with the great Lord Mansfield, to 
whom he was junior about four years ; but in consequence of the Chief 
Justice having spent some time in travelling on the Continent, after he 
had quitted Christ Church, there was only the difference of a few 
months in their standing at the bar, Murray being the senior by three 
terms. Another distinguished school-fellow of theirs was Sir Thomas 
Clarke, afterwards Master of the Rolls, so that the three highest stations 
in the law were occupied at the same moment by three Westminster 
men. Murray and Clarke were both King’s scholars; Henley was an 
oppidan. I have no means of knowing what acquisitions of learning 
he made, or what disposition he exhibited till he was transferred to St. 
John’s College, Oxford. There he was entered, and began to reside, on 
the 19th of November, 1724, in his seventeenth year. j 

At this time Alma Mater still lay ‘dissolved in port,” and young 
Henley, as soon as he,was matriculated, piously contracted a great 
passion for that generous liquor—which adhered to him through life, 
and made him despise claret and all other thin potations.* He did not 
altogether neglect classical learning, but without being thought at all 
remarkably deficient in mathematics, he only knew the difference, i in 
general appearance, between a triangle, a circle, and a square, remain- 
ing ignorant of the most common properties of those figures. He chiefly 
delighted in humour and buffoonery, laying the foundation of that ex- 
traordinary collection of droll, and not very delicate stories which gave 
brilliancy to his subsequent career. On the 3d of November, 1727, he 
was clected a fellow of All Souls, a distinction for which he was sup- 
posed to be chiefly indebted to his powers of amusement. He did not 
take his degree of Master of Arts till the 5th of July, 1733. 

But on the Ist of February, 1738, he was entered of the Inner Temple, 
and was supposed to begin his juridical studies. We are told that 
Murray, when he first came to town, “ drank champagne with the wits,” 
and that his classic tastes and literary attainments led him to prefer 
the society of scholars and men of genius to that of his professional 
brethren. Henley was devoted to the juice of a more powerful vintage, 
which, in the society he haunted, flowed in very copious streams, 
Though not devoid of scholarship, ‘and possessing a rich fund of anec- 
dote of a peculiar sort, his conversation was too jovial and boisterous to 


* With what delight would he have perused the panegyric upon his favourite 
beverage, to be found in a late article in the “ Quarterly Review,” on the two cele- 
brated brothers, “ Lords Stowell and Eldon.” “He and Lord Eldon perfectly 
agreed in one great taste—ifa noble thirst should be called by so finical a name— 
an attachment to port wine, strong almost as that to Constitution and Crown ; and, 
indeed, a modification of the same sentiment. It is the proper beverage of a great 
lawyer—that, by the strength of which Blackstone wrote his Commentaries, and 
Sir William Grant modulated his judgments, and Lord Eldon repaired the ravages 
of study, and withstood the shocks of party and of time.” May I add—* that, by 
which Serjeant Talfourd was enabled to prepare a great argument for the Court of 
Common Pleas ; and was inspired to write the immortal tragedy of Ion.” From the 
fervid eloquence and poetical exaggeration of the passage, he, I suspect it is who 
adds: “ This sustaining, tranquillizing meres is the true cement of various labours, 
and prompter of great thoughts "—Q. R., No. exlix. p. 52. 


158 LIFE OF 


be endured in the circles where the accomplished Murray shone. 
Having attended the Courts in the morning, and read a little black- 
letter law on his return, he gave himself to ** pleasure, in the way he liked 
it,” for the rest of the day, witha few thirsty ‘* All Souls” friends, or some 
congenial spirits of the Temple. The truth is, that hard drinking was 
at that time the ruling vice and bane of society, and Henley was not, 
at his early period of life, fortunate enough to escape the general con- 
tagion. He afterwards so far reformed as not to allow his love of wine 
very seriously to interfere with the pressing business of life, but many 
a severe fit of the gout was the result of his youthful indulgences, 
When suffering from the effects of this disease, he was once heard, in 
the House of Lords, to mutter, after several hobbling and painful walks, 
with the purse in his hand, between the woolsack and the bar, “If [ 
had only known that these legs were one day to carry a Lord Chan- 
cellor, ’d have taken better care of them whey I was a lad.” 

However, he wasa very shrewd fellow ; re an exceedingly good 
head for law, and from occasional starts of application, he made much 
more progress than dull plodders who pore constantly over the * Year 
Books.” Although he never could be called a scientific lawyer, he 
acquired a competent practical knowledge of his profession, and could 
get up very reputably all the learning on any particular question with 
which he had to deal. He was called to the bar, by the Soctety of the 
Inver Temple, on the 23d of June, 1732.* 

He began with taking a seat in the back row of the Court of King’s 
Bench, where he had long little employment but to take notes, to crack 
jokes, and to arrange supper parties. From family connexions he 
chose the Western Circuit, of which he afterwards became the leader, 
but there his progress was very slow. 

He had at first a few briefs at Winchester. He showed himself very 
handy in business, and displayed great skill in cross-examining wit- 
nesses, although he was sometimes supposed to take unjustifiable liber- 
ties with them. Bishop Newton, who was very intimate with him, as 
they had been at Westminster together, relates an anecdote of his having 
cross-examined a broad-brimmed saint, named ZepHanran Reeve, at 
Bristol, with so much raillery and effect, that the Quaker, forgetting 
the pacific tenets of his sect, actually sent him a message, insisting on 
honourable satisfaction, or an apology. Mr, Henley was by no means 
wanting in courage, but, sensible that he had exceeded the bounds ot 
professional license, and anxious to escape the ridicule of going into the 
field with such an antagonist, very readily adopted the latter alterna- 
tive. Many years afterwards, when he was Lord Chancellor, having 
had a couple of pipes of Madeira consigned to him at Bristol, he remem- 
bered ZEPHANIAH, and employed him to pay the freight and duty upon 
them, and forward them to the Grange, ‘The winter following,” says 


* He was afterwards admitted of Lincoln’s Inn (1745), but this was only to 
qualify him to hold chambers. The Inner Temple was always his trne Inn of 
Court; and he became a bencher of that society on being made a King’s counsel 
in 1751. ‘ 


LORD NORTHINGTON. 159 


the Bishop, ‘* when the Quaker was in town, he dined at the Chancel- 
lor’s with a large party of nobility and members of the House of Com- 
mons. After dinner the Chancellor related the whole story of his first 
acquaintance with his friend Reeve, and of every particular that had 
passed between them, with great good-humour and pleasantry, and to 
the no little diversion of the company.” 

In those days the smart junior barristers used to pass their vacations 
at Bath, a custom not entirely left off when | first knew the profession. 
Young Counsellor Henley was there, the gayest of the gay, and distin- 
guished himself among the ladies in the pump-room in the morning, as 
well as among the topers in the tavern at night. Here he formed a 
rather romantic attachment, of which, from his rattling, reckless 
manner, and his being a professed votary of the god, “ ever fair and 
ever young,” he was supposed to be incapable. ‘There was at Bath, 
for the benefit of the waters, a very young girl of exquisite beauty, who, 
from illness, had lost the use of her limbs so completely that she was 
only able to appear in public wheeled about in a chair. She was the 
daughter and co-heiress of Sir John Husband, of Ipsley, in Warwick- 
shire, who, though not “of that ilk,” was the last male of a time- 
honoured race, whom Dugdale states to have been Lords of that manor 
in lineal succession from the Conquest. Henley, struck by the charms 
of her face, contrived to be introduced to her, when he was still more 
fascinated by her conversation. His admiration soon ripened into a 
warm and tender attachment, which he had reason to hope was reci- 
procal. But it seemed as if he had fallen in love with a Perz, and that 
he must for ever be contented with sighing and worshipping at her 
shrine—when suddenly the waters produced so effectual and complete 
a cure, that Miss Husband was enabled to comply with the custom of 
the place by hanging up her votive crutches to the nymph of the 
spring, and to dance the ‘ minuet de la cour” at the lower rooms with 
her lover. Soon after, with the full consent of her family, she gave her 
hand to the suitor who had so sedulously attended her. To the end of 
a long life she continued to enjoy a most perfect state of health, and 
their affection remaining unabated, she gave him that first of human 
blessings, a serene and happy home. The marriage 1743 
ceremony was performed by his schoolfellow, Bishop bbe Poh Aa 
Newton,—of which that prelate, in his Memoirs, has the following 
agreeable recollection: ‘It happened that he and his lady were mar- 
ried by Mr. Newton, at the chapel in South Audley Street, at which 
time they were a very handsome couple. Several years afterwards 
Mr. Newton went one day into Lincoln’s Inn Hall while the Court was 
sitting, to speak with Mr. Murray on some business,—Mr. Henley being 
next to him, and reading a brief. When he had despatched his busi- 
ness, and was coming away, ‘ What,’ said Mr. Murray to Henley, 
‘have you forgotten your old friend Newton, or have you never for- 
given the great injury that he did you?’ Upon which he started as 
out of a dream, and was wonderfully gracious to his old school/ellow, 


160 REIGN OF GEORGE II. 


‘ \ 
acknowledging that he owed all his happiness in life to him. And, in- 
deed, he had good reason to be happy in his wife and family.”’* 

His business not being yet very lucrative, and her father surviving 
for some years, the newly married couple started with but slender 
means. Their first residence was a small house in Great James Street, 
Bedford Row, where they lived for three years very quietly, but very 
contentedly—in a style congenial to the simplicity of their tastes. 
After he became Lord Chancellor and Lord Lieutenant for Hampshire, 
both be and his wife would often look back with pleasing recollection 
from the Grange and Grosvenor Square to the freedom and frugality 
of their early establishment near Bedford Row, ‘ where a leg of mutton 
lasted them three days,—the first day hot,—the second day cold,—and 
the third day hashed.” 

His farther rise was now in great peril by the death of his elder 
brother Anthony without issue, whereby the family estates in Hamp- 
shire and Dorsetshire descended upon him, with the fine house on the 
south side of Lincoln’s Inn Fields, now occupied by the College of 
Surgeons. Fortunately the property was found much encumbered with 
debt, or the future Chancellor and Earl would have sunk into a country 
Squire, perhaps distinguished by filling the chair at sessions—Petty and 
Quarter. ‘The good management of a few years cleared off, or greatly 
lightened, the incumbrances, but by this time objects of high ambition 
had presented themselves to him, and the notion of rural retirement had 
lost all its attractions, 

After his marriage, Henley continued to go frequently to Bath, car- 
rying his wife along with him. He now led comparatively a sober life, 
but occasionally he would indulge in his old convivial habits, and by 
his toasts and his stories, and his very agreeable manners, he ingra- 
tiated himself so much with the Mayor and Common Council, forming 
a very small corporation,—with the right of returning members to 
Parliament exclusively vested in them,—that they made him their Re- 
corder, and agreed to elect him at the next vacancy one of their repre- 
sentatives, being swayed, perhaps, not merely by his personal good qua- 
lities, but the prospect of his being now able to show his gratitude for 
their kindness to him. Accordingly, on the dissolution of Parliament, 
which took place in the summer of the year 1747, he was elected a 
representative for Bath along with Field Marshal Wade, who had gained 
such notoriety during the recent rebellion, T 

He became a warm supporter of the party of Frederick Prince of 
Wales, designated by the appellation of ‘ Lezcester House,” to which 
several eminent lawyers were already attached, — particularly Sir 
Thomas Booth, Chancellor of the Duchy, Dr. (afterwards Sir George) 
Lee, the eminent civilian, and the Honourable Hume Campbell, after- 
wards Earl of Marchmont, celebrated as the friend of Pope,—a set 
who, struggling for a share of the favours of the Crown during the pre- 
sent reign, confidently expected to monopolize the whole in the next, 


* Newt Mem. + 14 Parl. Hist. 77. 


LIFE OF LORD NORTHINGTON. 161 


It is with deep disappointment that, turning to the Parliamentary re- 
cords to ascertain when the new member for Bath made his maiden 
speech, and by what steps he acquired such a position in the House of 
Commons as to be appointed Attorney-General to the Crown, and after- 
wards to be entrusted with the Great Seal,—I cannot discover, during 
the ten years he sat in that assembly, his name once mentioned or re- 
ferred to.* It appears, however, from Horace Walpole and contemporary 
memoir-writers, that he was a frequent and active debater. He seems to 
have been anxious to come forward, as often as he thought he could be of 
any service to his party, without aiming at oratorical distinction. He 
was noted as a very steady and consistent politician, so that he did not 
derive the same benefit from the oblivion of his harangues which might 
have been enjoyed by some of his successors, who, in the discussion of 
important questions, have spoken with equal ability on. both sides. 

In 1751 a heavy blow fell upon Leicester House in the sudden death 
of Frederick, Hume Campbell, and others, took the opportunity of 
going over to St. James’s, but Henley adhered to the Princess Dowager, 
and, although he thereby rendered himself obnoxious to George II., he 
secured his ultimate elevation, Frederick’s eldest son (afterwards 
George If.) being created Prince of Wales, and his establishment being 
formed, Henley became Solicitor-General to hiss Royal Highness, and 
at the same time he was appointed a King’s counsel. Jn respect to this 
last promotion, there being a salary of forty pounds a-year annexed to 
the office, he vacated his seat in the House of Commons; but he was 
re-elected without opposition. 

Henley’s silk gown had great success. He not only got into the de- 
cided lead on the Western Circuit, but was now in the first business in 
the Court of King’s Bench, both in banc and at nisi prius. He occa- 
sionally went into the Court of Chancery in important causes, but, ac- 
cording to the general usage of the eighteenth century, he did not regu- 
larly practise there till he became a law officer of the Crown, 

So things went on till the year 1756, when Murray insisting on 
leaving the House of Commons, and being appointed Chief Justice of 
the King’s Bench, the Duke of Newcastle resigned, and a new adminis- 
tration was formed, Leicester House was a party to this arrangement, 
and Henley succeeded Murray in the office of Attorney- Nov. 1756 
General, without having previously filled the office are DY yh BRel 
Solicitor-General to his Majesty.t Now he left the circuit, and trans- 
ferred himself to the Court of Chancery, where, from the good founda- 
tion he had laid in conducting common-law proceedings, from his 
natural shrewdness and handiness, and from the influence his station 
was supposed to give him over the Lords Commissioners who held the 


* See Parl. Hist. xiv. xv. 

t+ 14 Parl. Hist. 77. The inconvenience of vacating a seat in Parliament by a silk 
gown was afterwards obviated by “ patents of precedence,” or by declaring that the 
office was to be held “ without fee or reward.” 

t Sir Richard Lloyd, the Solicitor under the Duke of Newcastle, was dismissed, 
but was afterwards made a Baron of the Exchequer. Henley had for his colleague 
as Solicitor the famous Charles Yorke, whose story we shall by and by have to tell. 

VOL, V. 11 


162 REIGN OF GEORGE II. 


Great Seal, in the room of Lord Hardwicke, he immediately came into 
full employment, and was able to cope with the old Chancery counsel, 
notwithstanding the advantage they enjoyed in being able to make 
broad assertions as to the settled practice of the Court, and to cite un- 

published decisions of the late Lord Chancellor, expressly in point. 
[Aprrt, 1757.] He was soon much disturbed by the dismissal of 
; Mr, Pitt and Mr. Legge, and the prospect of himself 
being turned adrift by the total dissolution of the ministry. By and 
bye he was a little comforted by finding that, with the concurrence of 
Leicester House, negotiations were opened for a coalition betwen differ- 
ent parties,—but soon alarmed by the report that Lord Hardwicke, who 
he thought had a particular spite against him, was to resume the office 
of Chancellor,—and again re-assured by the intelligence that Mr. Pitt 
peremptorily objected to this arrangement. Next followed a confident 
statement, which was not very disagreeable to him, that Sir Eardley 
Wilmot, the junior Lord Commissioner, was to be Chancellor ; but this 
was contradicted by that worthy person, who, in a letter to his brother, 
which was handed about, said, ‘* the acting junior of the commission 
was a spectre | started at, but the sustaining the office alone I must and 
will refuse at all events; I will not give up my peace of mind to any 
earthly consideration whatever: bread and water are nectar and am- 
brosia compared with the supremacy of a court of justice.”* One day 
Henley was much excited by hearing that the Great Seal had been 
offered to Lord Mansfield, and by anticipating that he might accept it, 
so as to leave the Chief Justiceship of the King’s Bench to the Attorney- 
General. Then came certain intelligence that Lord Mansfield having 
refused the Great Seal, it had been tendered to Sir John Willes, the 
Chief Justice of the Common Pleas, who was willing enough to accept 
it, but was standing out for a peerage, which the King objected to, 
although the last six Chancellors had been Peers, and there had been 
a general belief that a gagged Keeper or Chancellor would not again 

be placed on the woolsack. 
Henley had not, down to this time, entertained the most distant 
notion of the Great Seal being offered to himself, as he 
[a. D. 1757.) 1g onl ns 

only very recently been made Attorney-General 
from practising in a common law Court, and he felt that he had not 
sufficient political consequence to aspire to such a dignity. But (as 
sometimes happens) his mediocrity was the real cause of his elevation. 
Mr. Pitt knew enough of him from his appearances in the House of 
Commons to be sure ‘that he could not be formidable in the cabinet,— 
though considered a fair lawyer, qualified decently to get through the 
duties of a judicial office ;—and under colour of paying a compliment 
to Leicester House, and effectually to bar the return of that old Vol- 
pone, Lord Hardwicke, he proposed, with seeming disinterestedness, 
that the Attorney-General, though not politically connected with him, 
should be the man. Jueicester House was rejoiced, and the Duke of 


* In fact, the offer was not made to Wilmot on this occasion, although it was, and 
refused, (as we shall see,) twice over, in the year F770. 


‘ 


LIFE OF LORD NORTHINGTON. 163 


Newcastle did not object, being somewhat indifferent about the appoint- 
ment since he could not procure it for Lord Hardwicke. 

The King was obliged to yield any point on which the three par- 
ties were agreed ; but as Henley, from his connexion with Frederick 
and with the present Prince of Wales was personally disagreeable to 
him, he stipulated that the Great Seal must now be taken without a 
peerage. The offer being made to, Henley with this condition, he in- 
stantly and joyously accepted it, not even stipulating for a pension, or 
the reversion of a Tellership to his son, which had been usual on such 
occasions.™* 

He then thought it would be decent to inform the Chief Justice of the 
Common Pleas of what had happened.—Their interview on this occa- 
sion is the subject of one of the stock-stories of Westminster Hall. 
Thus it used to be related with characteristic humour by the late Lord 
Ellenborough :—* Immediately after Willes had refused the Seals, Hen- 
ley called upon him at his villa, and found him walking in the garden, 
highly indignant at the affront which he considered that he had received 
in an offer so inadequate to his pretensions. After entering into some 
detail of his grievances, he concluded by asking, ‘ whether any man of 
spirit could, under such circumstances, have taken the Seals ;’ adding, 
‘ Would you, Mr. Attorney, have done so?’ Henley, thus appealed to, 
gravely said,‘ Why, my Lord, I am afraid tt is rather too late to enter 
ento such a discussion, as I have now the honour of waiting upon your 
Lordship to inform you that I have actually accepted them.” 

He was sworn in as Lord Keeper at a Council held on the 30th of 
June, 1757, and on the first day of Michaelmas term following, after a 
grand procession to Westminster Hall, he was duly installed in the Court 
of Chancery.{ 


* Horace Walpole says, contrary to truth, that he demanded and obtained both: 
“ Willes proposed to be bribed’ by a peerage, to be at the head of his profession; but 
could not obtain it Henley, however, who saw it was the mode of the times 
to be paid by one favour for receiving another, demanded a Tellership of the Exche- 
quer for his son; which was granted, with a pension of 1500/. a year till it should 
drop.’—Walp. Mem., Geo. II. vol. 11. 226. These jobs were afterwards done for 
him. ; 

t Henley’s Life of Northington, 34,—Horace Walpole attributed Henley’s pro- 
motion, on this occasion, to Mr. Pitt’s great desire to make Pratt (afterwards Lord 
Camden) Attorney-General: “ One of the most extraordinary parts of the new sys- 
tem is the advancement of Sir Robert Henley. He was made Attorney-General by 
Mr. Fox at the end of last year, and made as bad a figure as might be: Mr Pitt in- 
sisting upon an Attorney-General of his own, Sir Robert Henley is made Lord 
Keeper !”—Horace Walpole to Sir H. Mann, 3d July, 1757. This possibly might 
be an ingredient in Mr, Pitt’s determination; but, I conceive, that his chief motive 
was to exclude Lord Hardwicke by a man who could not be dangerous. 

¢ 30th June, 1757.—* The Lords Commissioners, for the custody of the Great 
Seal of Great Britain, having delivered the said Great Seal to the King at his Palace 
at Kensington, on Thursday, the 30th day of June, 1757, his Majesty, about one 
o'clock the same day, delivered it to Sir Robert Henley, knight, his Attorney-Gene- 
ral, with the title of Lord Keeper, who was then sweks into the said office before 
his Majesty in counci, His Lordship sat at Lincoln’s Inn Hall during the Seals 
after Trinity Term, and the Seals before Michaelmas Term, 1757. And on Mon- 
day, the 7th day of November, being the first day of Michaelmas Term, he went in 


164 REIGN OF GEORGE II. 


CHAPTER CXXXIX, 


CONTINUATION OF THE LIFE OF “LORD NORTHINGTON TILL THE 
DEATH OF GEORGE II, 


Tur new Lord Keeper had nothing to divert him from his judicial 
duties. His political functions were long in a state of abeyance. 
He had a pretty strong suspicion in his own mind that he was appointed 
because he was likely to be quiet in the cabinet, and* he did not 
seek to interfere. Formal meetings of it were occasionally called, 
which he attended, but he was as little consulted by Pitt about the raising 
of Highland regiments, or the conduct of the war, as the six Clerks or 
the Masters in Chancery. If there had been any debates in Parliament, 
he was precluded from taking part in them; but there were none,—all 
opposition having vanished for several years,—and neither his time nor 
his attention was in any degree occupied by the sittings of the House of 
Lords, which generally lasted only while prayers were read, and the 
question was put ‘ that this Flouse do now adjourn.” If a motion was 
introduced by a speech, it was to vote a monument to a hero who had 
fallen in battle, or thanks to his surviving comrades,,and the Lord 
Keeper, as Speaker, had only to transmit these thanks, and to read from 
the woolsack the answers which he received. 

Let us follow him then into the Court of Chancery, where his duties 
were arduous. Here he acquitted himself respectably ; but he was con- 
tented if he could continue to fill the office, escaping censure,—without 
aiming at great reputation. He did not follow the example of the fathers 
of Equity, Lord Nottingham and Lord Hardwicke, who, on coming to 
the Great Seal, notwithstanding much previous familiarity with the busi- 
ness of the Court in which they were called upon to preside, entered 
upon a laborious and systematic course of inquiry and of study to 
qualify themselves for their new situation, that they might discharge its 
duties in a manner satisfactory to their own minds, and in the hope of 
being permanently applauded as consummate magistrates. He was sa- 


state from his house in Lincoln’s Inn Fields to Westminster Hall, accompanied by 
the Earl Granville, Lord President of the Council, the Duke of Rutland, Lord Stew- 
ard of the Household, the Duke of Newcastle, First Lord of the Treasury, the Earl 
of Hardwicke, the Lord Anson, First Lord of the Admiralty, the Lord Vis. Dupplin, 
Sir Thomas Robinson, Knight of the Bath, the Master of the Rolls, the Judges, 
King’s Serjeants, King’s Counsel, and several other persons. The Lords accom. 
panied him into the Court of Chancery, where (before he entered upon business), in 
their presence, he took the oaths of allegiance and supremacy, and the oath of Lord 
Keeper of the Great Seal of Great Britain, the Master of the Rolls holding the book, 
and the Deputy-Clerk of the Crown reading the said oaths; \hich, being done, the 
Attorney-General moved that it might be recorded, and it wat ordered accordingly. 
Then the Lords departed, leaving the Lord Keeper in Court.”—Roll, 1726-1757. 


LIFE OF LORD NORTHINGTON. 165 


tisfied with the stores of professional learning (not inconsiderable) which 
he had laid in, and with bestowing a reasonable share of pains on the dif- 
ferent cases which successively came before him. He always took full 
notes of the arguments of counsel, and he investigated important questions 
with much research. Sometimes he wrote out elaborate judgments in his 
own hand. On the bench he was universally allowed to be impartial and 
upright. Laudatus a laudato, he was pronounced by Lord Eldon to 
have been “‘a great lawyer, and very firm in delivering his opinion.” 
He attended Court in the morning with alacrity and cheerfulness, but 
the evening sittings were a great annoyance to him, from their interfe- 
rence with his convivial pleasures,—and he at Jast succeeded in abolish- 
ing them. With the able assistance of Sir Thomas Clarke, the Master 
of the Rolls, he contrived pretty well to keep down arrears, although 
complaints of delay were much louder than in the time of Lord Hard- 
wicke, and the Court was by no means in such good odour with the 
public, The consequence was that, in all important cases, there was an 
appeal to the House of Lords. The state of things there was very dif- 
ferent from what it had been for twenty years past. The Judge, who 
had pronounced the decree appealed from, had now neither vote nor 
voice ; he could not even.ask a question of the counsel at the bar; and 
a motion being made for a reversal, he could only say, ‘the Contents 
have wt.” Ex-chancellor Lord Hardwicke always attended, and Lord 
Mansfield very frequently. It would be wrong to say that they had any 
inclination to reverse, but they bore no particular good-will to the Lord 
Keeper, who belonged to a different section in politics from them, aad 
whose authority on questions of Equity they did not consider very high. 
However, when he acquired a little more experience, and when, being 
raised to the Peerage, he could freely defend his opinions, he stood higher 
as a Judge, and appeals from him became more rare. It is said that, 
after all, ** only six of his decrees were reversed or materially altered.’”’* 

For a long interval after his death, the proceedings of the Court of 
Chancery in his time had been very insufficiently reported, and when I 
first entered the profession there were only traditionary recollections of 
his judgments as of his jests ;f but a few years ago the pious labours of 
his grandson, my most amiable and accomplished friend, the late Lord 
Henley, from the Chancellor’s own MSS., and from notes taken by 
several eminent counsel who had practised under him, produced two 
volumes of his decisions, which ‘ greatly raised his reputation with 
those best qualified to estimate it.” These show him to have been 
very bold and very vigorous, and generally very sound, but they are cer- 
tainly wanting in the depth of thought, in the logical precision, and in 
the extreme caution which distinguished the decisions of his prede- 
cessor. 

I shall give, as a favourable and characteristic specimen of his man- 
ner, the judgment delivered by him in the case of Norton v. Relly,t 
where the bill was filed by a maiden lady residing at Leeds, against a 


* Life, 56. + Ambler alone had noticed him. ¢ Eden’s Rep. ii. 286. 


166 REIGN OF GEORGE II. 


Methodist preacher, and others, trustees named in a deed of gift executed 
by her to him,—suggesting that it had been obtained by undue means, 
—and praying that it might be delivered up to be cancelled. The 
“« Tartuffe” had introduced himself to her notice by a letter, in which 
he said, that ‘‘ although unknown to her in the flesh, from the report he 
had of her he made bold to address her as a fellow-member of that 
consecrated body wherein the fulness of the Godhead dwelt, and that he 
was coming among them at Leeds for a little time to preach the king- 
dom of God,” subscribing himself ‘“‘her affectionate brother in the 
flesh.” She was prevailed upon to invite him to her house, to accom- 
pany him to London, to give him large sums of ready money, and to 
grant him an annuity charged on her real estates in Yorkshire.-—Lord 
Chancellor Henley. ‘ 'This cause, as it has been very truly observed, 
is the first of the kind that ever came before the Court, and, I may add, 
before any Court of judicature in this kingdom, Matters of religion 
are happily very rarely the subject of dispute in Courts of Law or 
Equity.” [After expressing his respect for dissenters he proceeds :] 
‘“‘ But very wide is the difference between dissenters and fanatics, whose 
canting, and whose doctrines, have no other tendency than to plunge 
their deluded votaries into the very abyss of bigotry, despair, and 
enthusiasm, And though, even against those unhappy and false pas- 
tors, I would not wish the spirit of persecution to go forth, yet are not 
these men to be discountenanced and discouraged whenever they are 
properly brought before Courts of justice 7—men who, in the apostle’s 
language, go about and creep into people’s dwellings, deluding weak 
women—men who go about and diffuse their rant and warm enthu- 
siastic notions, to the destruction not only of the temporal concerns of 
many of the subjects of this realm, but to the endangering their eternal 
welfare. And shall it be said that this Court cannot relieve against 
the glaring impositions of these men?., That it cannot relieve the weak 
and unwary, especially when the impositions are exercised on those of 
the weaker sex? This Court is the guardian and protector of the weak 
and helpless of every denomination, and the punisher of fraud and im- 
position in every degree. Here is a man, nobody knows who or what 
he is ; his own counsel have taken much pains modestly to tell me what 
he is not; and depositions have been read to show that he is not a 
Methodist. What is that to me? But I could easily have told them 
what by the proofs in this cause and his own letters he appears to be— 
a subtle sectary who preys upon his deluded hearers, and robs them 
under the mask of religion. Shall it be said in his excuse that this 
lady was as great an enthusiast as himself? It is true she was far 
gone—but not far enough for his purpose. Thus he addressed her, 
‘ Your former pastor has, I hear, excommunicated you, but put your- 
self in my congregation, wherein dwells the fulness of God? How 
scandalous, how blasphemous is this! In coming from London to 
Leeds he will not come in a stage coach, but must have a post-chaise, 
and live elegantly on the road at the expense of the plaintiff, who gave 
him 50d. in money, besides presents of Jiquor—so that his own hot 


LIFE OF LORD NORTHINGTON. 167 


imagination was further heated with the spirit of brandy. He secured 
a part of her fortune by lighting up in her breast the flame of enthusiasm, 
and undoubtedly he hoped in due time to secure the whole by kindling 
another flame in which the female breast is so susceptible ; for the in- 
variable style of his letters is ‘ ad/ zs to be completed by love and union.’ 
Let it not be told in the streets of London that this preaching sectary 
is only defending his just rights. I repeat, let not such men be perse- 
cuted, but many of them deserve to be represented in puppet shows. 
I have considered this cause not merely as a private matter, but of pub- 
lic concernment and utility. Bigotry and enthusiasm have spread their 
baneful influence amongst us far and wide, and the unhappy objects of 
the contagion almost daily increase. Of this, not only Bedlam, but 
most of the private madhouses, are melancholy and striking proofs. 
Let it be decreed that the defendant execute a release to the plaintiff of 
this annuity, and deliver up the deed for securing it. I cannot conclude 
without observing that one of his counsel, with some ingenuity, tried 
to shelter him under the denomination of ‘an independent preacher.’ 
I have tried in thie decree to spoil his ‘ independency.’ ” 

The finest judgment Henley ever delivered is supposed to have been 
in the case of Burgess v..Wheate,* where the question was ‘ whether 
the Crown be entitled by escheat to a trust estate upon the cestuz que 
trust (or person beneficially interested) dying without issue?’ He 
called in the assistance of Lord Mansfield and Sir Thomas Clarke, who, 
differing, he sided with the latter against the escheat, so as to leave the 
estate to the trustee discharged of every trust,—and his decision has 
given the rule ever since. But it proceeds on reasonings too teehnical 
and abstruse to be introduced here. 

He likewise obtained great credit for the rule he laid down, respect- 
ing perpetutties, in the case of Duke of Marlborough v. Earl of Godol- 
phin. The hero of Blenheim, endeavouring to retain after death a 
power beyond the limits allowed by law, devised his great estates to 
trustees for the benefit of several existing persons successively for life, 
with remainder to their sons in strict settlement; but directed his 
trustees on the birth of each son of each tenant for life, to revoke the 
uses before limited to their respective sons in tail male, and to limit 
the estates to such sons for their lives. —Lord Keeper. ‘It is agreed 
on all hands that this clause is new, and that, although it has been 
privately fostered by a particular family, from whom it issued, it never 
has been adopted by conveyancers. In substance, the testator makes 
his great-grandsoa, the present Duke, who was at the date of the will 
unborn, tenant for life, with a limitation to his sons as purchasers in 
tail. lt is agreed that this could not be done directly by words of 
limitation, because, though by the rules of law an estate may be limited, 
by way of contingent remainder, to a person not tm esse for life, or as 
an inheritance, yet a remainder to the issue of such contingent remain- 
der-man, as a purchaser, is a limitation unheard of in law, nor ever 


* Eden’s Rep. i. 177. + Eden’s Rep. i. 404, 


168 REIGN OF GEORGE IL 


attempted, as far as I have been able to discover. ‘Technical reasons, 
upheld by old repute and grown reverend by length of years, bear 
great weight and authority, but a new technical reason appears with as 
little dignity as an usurper just seated in his chair of state. The 
common law seemed wisely to consider that real property ought not to 
be put out of commerce, and should be left free to answer the exigencies 
of the possessors and their families, and, therefore, would not admit 
perpetuities by way of entails, ‘The dissipation of young heirs, the 
splendour of great families, the propriety of annexing sufficient posses- 
sions to support the dignities, obtained by illustrious persons, afford 
spacious arguments: for perpetuating estates by entails ; but, in a com- 
mercial country, to damp the spirit of industry, and to take away one 
of its greatest incentives, the power of honourably investing its acquisi- 
tions, ‘would produce all the inconveniences against which we have 
been guarding by fines and recoveries and other devices, now to be con- 
sidered an essential part of our jurisprudence. ‘The safety of creditors 
and purchasers requires that the law should be fixed and certain with 
respect to the limitations of real property in family settlements,—not 
subject to be questioned upon whimsical inventions, started (though by 
the ablest men) in order to introduce innovations in fundamentals.” 
After treating the subject at great length, and with much ability, he 
decreed that the plaintiff, George Duke “of Marlborough, was entitled 
to an estate in tail male, phd not for life only, as alone Duke of 
Marlborough had intended ; and this decree, on appeal, was affirmed by 
the House of Lords.* 

In the case of Lowther v. Cavendish, respecting the words in a will 
which will carry leasehold estates along with freeholds, Lord North- 
ington commented rather flippantly on the ruling authority of Rose v. 
Bartlett, which afterwards drew down upon him this strong censure 
from Lord Eldon, under the decent disguise that he had been misre- 
ported: “I am not disposed to believe that Lord Northington ever 
made use of the expressions respecting Rose v. Bartlett which are 
attributed to him. We all know that he was possessed of great law 
learning, and a very manly mind; and I cannot but think that he would 
rather have denied the rule altogether than have set it afloat, by treat- 
ing it with a degree of scorn, and by introducing distinctions calculated 
to disturb the judgments of his predecessors, and remove the landmarks 
of the law.”’$ 

But his greatest blunder was in Drury v. Drury,§ where he took 
immense pains to get wrong, holding that “a female marrying under 
age might renounce the jointure settled upon her, and claim dower and 
thirds,”—contrary to the practice and understanding of the profession, 
and contrary to an obzer opinion of Lord Hardwicke,—although there 
was no decision exactly in point.’ In the course of his rather arrogant 
judgment, he gave deep offence to the irritable race of conveyancers, by 
observing, in corroboration of a remark at the bar, that the conveyancers 
had not thought about it,—‘ which is natural enough, their time being 


* Life of Lord Northington, Appendix IT. + Ambler, 357. 
{ Thompson y. Lawly, 2 Bos. & Pull. 315. § Eden’s Rep. ii. 39. 


LIFE OF LORD NORTHINGTON. 169 


more dedicated to perusal than to thought!” But they had their re- 
venge when the case was heard, upon appeal, in the House of Lords, 
for Lord Hardwicke moved the reversal in a most crushing speech, in 
which he said ‘*the opinion—the course of conveyancers is of great 
weight. They are to advise, and if their opinion is to be despised, 
every case must come to law. No! the received opinion ought to 
govern. ‘The ablest men in the profession have been conveyancers.” 
Lord Mansfield concurred, and the poor Lord Keeper, having put the 
question, ‘‘ so many of your Lordships as are of opinion that this decree 
be reversed will say, ‘ Content ;’ of the contrary opinion, ‘ Nor Con- 
TENT, ” was obliged to say, ‘ the Conrents have it!” 

From George II.’s dislike to him, on account of his connexion with 
Leicester House, and from his insignificance in the Cabinet, he probably 
would have remained a commoner during the rest of this reign, had it 
not happened that Lord Ferrers thought fit to shoot Mr. Johnson, his 
steward, and was to be tried before the House of Peers for the murder. 
A Lord High Steward was to be appointed for the occasion, and he 
must be a Peer. Neither Lord Hardwicke nor Lord Mansfield coveted 
such a painful pre-eminence, and it had been usual that the holder of 
the Great Seal, ifa layman, should preside at such trials. Im conse- 
quence, on the 27th of March, 1760, Letters patent passed, creating 
“the right trusty and well-beloved Sir Robert Henley, Knight, a Peer 
of Great Britain, by the style and title of Baron Henley, of the Grange, 
in the county of Southampton.” 

The trial took place in Westminster Hall, on the 16th of April, 1760, 
and the two following days. ‘ Who,” writes Horace Walpole, giving 
& most amusing narrative of it to his correspondent at Florence, ‘ at 
the last trials* would have believed a prophecy that the three first men 
at the next should be Henley the lawyer, Bishop Secker,f and Dick 
Grenville?t The Judge and criminal were far inferior to those you 
have seen. For the Lord High Steward, he neither had any dignity 
nor affected any. Nay, he held it all so cheap, that he said at his 
own table tother day, ‘ Z well not send for Garrick and learn to act a 
part.’”§ There is no doubt considerable exaggeration here from the 
writer’s indiscriminate love of abuse and ridicule; but it must be ad- 
mitted that his Grace the Lord High Steward often carried his dislike 
of what he called “* humbug” to a most unwarrantable length, and both 
when sitting publicly on his tribunal, and in private society, did not 
scruple to violate the rules of decorum and decency. 

On this occasion, however, if there were a departure from the heral- 
dic injunctions of * bowing to the cloth of state,” or presenting to his 
Grace his white wand “on the knee,” a striking example was given to 


* Alluding to the rebel Lords in 1746. 

t Now Archbishop of Canterbury. 

t Now Earl Temple, and, as Lord Privy Seal, having precedence of Dukes. 

§ Letter to George Montague, Esq:, 19th April, 1760. To another correspondent 
he says— Lord Keeper was Lord High Steward; but was not at all too dignified a 
personage to sit on such a criminal; indeed, he gave himself no trouble to figure.” 


170 REIGN OF GEORGE IL. 


the world of substantial justice.* Were such a case now to come be- 
fore a jury, there would probably be an acquittal on the ground of 7- 
sanity, although the noble culprit was actuated by deep malice towards 
the deceased,—although he had contrived the opportunity of satiating 
his vengeance with much premeditation and art—and although the steps 
which he afterwards took showed that he was fully sensible of the mag- 
nitude and the consequences of his crime. 

The Lord High Steward having received the answer from every Peer 
present, to whom he put the question, * Gwelty, or not guilty ?”?— 
‘* GUILTY, UPON MY HONOUR,” himself standing uncovered at the chair, 
and laying his hand on his breast, said, ** My Lords, I am of opinion 
that Laurence Earl Ferrers is guilty of the felony and murder whereof 
he stands indicted, upon my HonouR.” He then announced to the un- 
fortunate Earl the unanimous verdict of his peers against him. 

The address of the Lord High Steward, delivered the following day 
in passing sentence, has been praised as ‘one of the best specimens of 
judicial eloquence in existence—being at once grave, simple, dignified, 
and affecting.” 


“‘ Laurence Earl Ferrers, 

Fe His Majesty, from his royal and equal regard to justice, and his 
steady attention to our constitution, which hath endeared him in a won- 
derful manner to the universal duty and affection of his subjects, hath 
commanded this inquiry to be made upon the blood of a very ordinary 
subject, against your Lordship, a Peer of this realm. Your Lordship 
hath been arraigned; hath pleaded and put yourself on your peers, and 
they (whose judicature subsists in wisdom, honour, and justice), have 
unanimously found your Lordship guilty of the felony and murder 
charged in the indictment. It is usual, my Lord, for Courts of justice, . 
before they pronounce the dreadful sentence ordained by the law, to 
open to the prisoner the nature of the crime of which he is convicted ; 
not in order to aggravate or afflict, but to awaken the mind to a due at- 
tention to, and consideration of, the unhappy situation into which he 
hath brought himself. My Lord, the crime of which your Lordship is 
found guilty—murder—is incapable of aggravation; and it is impossi- 
ble but that during your Lordship’s long confinement you must have re- 
flected upon it, represented to your mind in its deepest shades, and with 
all its train of dismal and detestable consequences, As your Lordship 
hath received no benefit, so you can derive no consolation from that 
refuge you seemed almost ashamed to take under a pretended insanity ; 
since it hath appeared to us all, from your cross-examination of the 
King’s witnesses, that you recollected the minutest circumstances of 
facts and conversations to which you and the witnesses only could be 
privy, with the exactness of a memory more than ordinarily sound ; it 
is therefore as unnecessary as it would be painful to me to dwell longer 

* I shall farther examine the case ie the Life of Charles Yorke, who acted a most 
important part in it. 


+ Life, by Lord Henley, 44. Mr. J ates Buller, in passing sentence on Donellan, 
borrowed a great part of it verbatim. 


‘LIFE OF LORD NORTHINGTON. 171 


on a subject so black and dreadful. It is with much satisfaction that [ 
can remind your Lordship that though from the present tribunal before 
which you now stand, you can receive nothing but strict and equal jus- 
tice ; yet you are soon to appear before an Almighty Judge, whose un- 
fathomable wisdom is able, by means incomprehensible to our narrow 
capacities, to reconcile justice with mercy.* But your Lordship’s edu- 
cation must have informed you, and you are now to remember that such 
beneficence is only to be obtained by deep contrition—sound, unfeigned, 
and substantial repentance. Confined strictly, as your Lordship must 
be, for the very short remainder of your life, according to the provisions 
of the late act, yet from the wisdom of the legislature, which, to pre- 
vent as much as possible this heinous and horrid crime of murder, hath 
added infamy to death, you will be still, if you please, entitled to con- 
verse and communicate with the ablest divines of the Protestant church, 
to whose pious care and consolation in fervent prayer and devotion, I 
most cordially recommend your Lordship. Nothing remains for me 
but to pronounce the dreadful sentence of the law, and the judgment of 
the law is, and this High Court doth award that you, Laurence Earl 
Ferrers, return to the prison of the Tower, from whence you came; 
from thence you must be led to the place of execution on Monday next, 
and when you come there, you must be hanged by the neck till you are 
dead, and your body must be dissected and anatomised, and God Al- 
mighty be merciful to your soul!” 

Henley acted with great propriety between the sentence and execution, 
doing what he could to gratify the unhappy criminal’s last wishes, with- 
out saving him from his deserved fate. Horace Walpole writes :—‘ Two 
petitions from his mother and all his family were presented to the King, 
who said, ‘ as the House of Lords had unanimously found him guilty, 
he would not interfere.’ Last week my Lord Keeper very good-natu- 
redly got out of a gouty bed to present another: the King would not 
hear him, ‘ Sir,’ said the Keeper, ‘I do not come to petition for mercy 
or respite, but that the 40007. which Lord Ferrers has in India bonds, 
may be permitted to go, according to his disposition of it, to his mistress, 
his children, and the family of the murdered man.’—‘ With all my 
heart,’ said the King, ‘I have no objection ; but I will have no message 
carried to him from me.’ However, this grace was notified to him, and 
gave him great satisfaction.” } 

After this trial, although the Lord Keeper was now entitled to speak 
and vote as a Peer, he was still treated rather contumeliously by his 
colleagues, and he does not appear to have taken any part in debate or 


* His Grace thought it unnecessary to disqualify himself as Baron Perrin did 
upon a similar trial for murder. The prisoner, after the verdict, having still asserted 
his innocence, the Judge thus modestly began: “ Prisoner, you are soon to appear 
at,the bar of a greater, and, let me add, of an abler Judge; but, with my limited 
understanding, | must approve of the verdict, and my duty requires me to pronounce 
upon you the awful sentence of the law.”—Ez relatione Lord Chief Baron Alex- 
ander. 

+ Letter to Sir Horace Mann, in which there is an extremely interesting account 
of the execution. 


172 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


in political intrigue till a new field was opened to him by the accession 
to the throne of the youthful Sovereign, to whom and to whose father 
he had been so much devoted. 





CHAPTER CXL. 


CONTINUATION OF THE LIFE OF LORD NORTHINGTON TILL HE 
RESIGNED THE GREAT SEAL, 


Tue death of George II. made a very favourable change in the posi- 
tion of the Lord Keeper. Hitherto he had been received coldly at Court, 
[Ocr. 25, 1760.] and he had been without any political Walgnt. The 
new King regarded him with great favour as a steady 
adherent of Leicester House, who might assist Lord Bute in the con- 
templated change in the administration. On the 16th of January, 1761, 
on his surrendering the Great Seal into his Majesty’s hands, he received 
it back with the title of ** Lord Chancellor,” instead of ‘* Lord Keeper,’’* 
and he was afterwards created Earl of Northington,t and appointed 
Lord Lieutenant of the County of Southampton.t 
He took the earliest opportunity to avail himself of the partiality of 
the reigning monarch, by asking his permission to discontinue the even- 
ing sittings in the Court of Chancery on Wednesdays and Fridays. 
George III. made a good story, which he used to tell for the rest of his 
reign, of what passed between him and his Chancellor on this occasion, 
*] asked him,” said his Majesty, ‘‘ his reason for wishing that these 
sittings should be abolished ?”—* Sir,” answered he, ‘that I may be 
allowed comfortably to finish my bottle of port after dinner: and your 
Majesty, solicitous for the happiness of all your subjects, I hope will 
consider this to be reason sufficient.”§ The permission was graciously 
accerded—we may suppose an explanation being added that post-pran- 
dian sittings were becoming generally unpopular, and were unsuited 
to the changed manners of society,|| 


* 1 Geo. 3, 16th January, 1761. Memorandum—That the Right Honourable 
Robert Lord Henley, Lord Keeper of the Great Seal of Great Britain, delivered the 
Great Scal to his Majesty in Council, when his Majesty was graciously pleased to 
re-deliver to him the said Great Seal, with the title of Lord Chancellor of Great 
Britain. Whereupon his Lordship, then in Council, took the oaths appointed to be 
taken instead of the oaths of allegiance, and also the oath of Lord High Chancellor 
of Great Britain.—Cr. Off. Min., No. 2, p.1. By another entry, No: 2, p. 4, it 
appears, that on the first day of the following Hilary Term, he took all the oaths 
over again in the Court of Chancery in Westminster Hall. 

t 19th of May, 1764.—By this title I shall hereafter call him. 

t 21st August, 1761. 

§ According to other accounts, the Lord Chancellor’s answer was still more 
blunt :—“ that I may get drunk, please your Majesty ;” or,—‘t because at that time 
I am apt to be drunk.” 

|| Sir William Grant, when Master of the Rolls, pursued another remedy, by 
ordering his diuner,—with a bottle of Madeira and a bottle of port,—to be ready for 
him at the Piazzs Coffee House, at ten at night, when the sittings were over. 


LIFE OF LORD NORTHINGTON., 173 


Lord Bute, being at first sworn of the Privy Council,—then made 
Secretary of State,—next forcing Mr. Pitt to resign,—and, at a short 
interval becoming himself Prime Minister, before he had -, 

: ; [Ocr. 1761.] 

ever spoken in Parliament,* and while only a Scotch 

Peer, without even being a representative one—the Leicester House 
Party, to which Lord Northington had so steadily adhered, was for a 
brief space triumphant, Although he now had a good deal of influ- 
ence in the disposal of places, and he took a part in the factious con- 
flicts which divided the Court, still he was not prominent as a politician. 
He does not seem to have been much consulted about the treaty of 
peace, which it was the great object of Lord Bute’s administration to 
negotiate, and severely as the preliminaries of Fontainebleau were at- 
tacked by Lord Hardwicke, I cannot find that he gave any assistance to 
defend them. He was even silent on the Cider Bill. He spoke, when 
permitted, in such trenchant fashion, and was so apt to give an advan- 
tage to the adversary, that I suspect he was strongly cautioned to re- 
main quiet. 

When Lord Bute, having obtained peace abroad and thrown all Eng- 
land into an uproar, suddenly resigned, and the Duke 4. aze63 
of Bedford was supposed to be Minister, Lord Northington betey ‘| 
retained the Great Seal, but while this arrangement continued he seems 
strictly to have confined himself to the judicial duties of his office. 
Having received a personal order from the King that Wilkes should be 
prosecuted, he left the matter entirely in the hands of the law officers of 
the Crown.t The general warrants were issued by Lord Halifax to 
arrest the printer and publisher of No. 45 of the “ North Briton,” and 
the successive foolish steps were adopted which brought the Demagogue 
into such notoriety and importance, without the head of the law being 
at all consulted. 

George Grenville, who was intended to act only a subordinate part 
in this government, had established a great ascendency, and acting 
upon the contracted notions of the constitution of the country which 
he had imbibed when studying for the bar in a special pleader’s office, 
he threw everything into confusion at home, and he sowed the seeds 
of that terrible conflict, which after he was in his grave, led to the 
dismemberment of the British Empire. — It is little to the credit of Lord 
Northington, that while he was Chancellor, the ill-omened plan was 
adopted of taxing America by the British Parliament, and the too 
famous American Stamp Act was passed. A constitutional lawyer 
in the cabinet, like Lord Camden, would have reprobated such a 


* It is a curious fact, that when he made his maiden speech he was prime minis- 
ter. His most public previous effort had been in private theatricals. 

+ “Lord Chancellor told me he had mentioned the ‘ North Briton’ to the King, 
and that his Majesty had desired him to give directions for the printers being pros- 
ecuted. In consequence of which, he had spoken to Lord Shelburn to have a case 


prepared for the opinion of the Attorney and Solicitor-General.’—Journal of the 
Duke of Grafton. 


174 REIGN OF GEORGE IIL. 


measure on principle, and a wary one, like Lord Mansfield, would 
have disapproved of it as dangerous. But Lord Northington, allowed 
to enjoy the sweets of his office, gave himself no trouble either about 
the domestic or colonial policy of the government. 

In the midst of the conflicts of faction, the town was amused for a 
short time by the trial of a Peer on a capital charge. William Lord 
Byron, uncle of the illustrious author of ‘‘ Cuitpe Haroun,” having 
killed a gentleman of the name of Chaworth in a duel fought ina tavern, 
an indictment for murder was found against him by a grand jury of the 
county of Middlesex, and was removed, by certiorari, into the House of 
Lords. Thereupon the trial was ordered to take place in Westminster 
Hall, and the Earl of Northington was appointed to preside as Lord High 
Steward. 

On the day appointed, the noble prisoner appearing, attended by the 

gentleman gaoler and the axe, with the edge turned 
Birtei de ica tee pk from him, his Grace addressed to him the following 
preliminary admonition and comfort ,—‘* William Lord Byron, your 
Lordship is unhappily brought to this bar to answera heavy and dread- 
ful accusation, for you are charged with the murder of a fellow-subject. 
The solemnity and awful appearance of this judicature must naturally 
embarrass and discompose your Lordship’s spirits, whatever internal 
resource you may have in conscience to support you in your defence. 
It may be, therefore, not improper for me to remind your Lordship that 
you are to be tried by tbe fixed and settled laws ofa free country, 
framed only to protect the innocent, to distinguish the degrees of offence, 
and vindictive only against malice and premeditated mischief. Homicide, 
or the killing of a fellow creature, is, by the wisdom of law, distinguished 
into classes; if it ariseth from necessity or accident, or is without malice, 
it is not murder; and of these distinctions, warranted by evidence, 
every person, though accused by a grand jury of the highest offence, is 
at full liberty to avail himself. As an additional consolation, your 
Lordship will reflect that you have the happiness to be tried by the 
supreme jurisdiction of this nation ; that you can receive nothing from 
your peers but justice, distributed with candour,—delivered, too, under 
the strongest obligation upon noble minds—honour. ‘These considera- 
tions will, | hope, compose your Lordship’s mind, fortify your spirits, 
and leave you free for your defence.” 

Allthe Peers present having agreed in a verdict of ‘* Manslaughter,” 
except four, who said Not Guzlty generally, and privilege of peerage 
being pleaded in bar of sentence, the Lord High Steward, without, as 
usual, giving a warning that such a plea could not be available on a second 
conviction, merely informed the prisoner that he was entitled to be dis- 
charged,—broke his white wand in a manner which could not be con- 
sidered an imitation of Garrick in Prospero,—and abruptly adjourned 
the House. 

Now, as at the trial of Lord Ferrers, he was too regardless of forms, 


LIFE OF LORD NORTHINGTON, 175 


but he committed no material mistake of which the accused or the 
public could complain.* 

When, at last, the King was so sick of being ruled and lectured by 
George Grenville, that he preferred Lord Rockingham (Jury, 1765 
and the Whigs, without the aid of Mr. Pitt,—a great 3 ‘| 
mistake was committed by them in not insisting on a new Chancellor. 
They did make Chief Justice Pratt a Peer, by the title of Lord Camden ; 
but if they had given him the Great Seal,—from his talents and popu- 
larity, they might have weathered the perils to which they were ex- 
posed, and the country, enjoying the benefit of their sound constitutional 
principles, might have escaped the anarchy and misgovernment which 
soon followed. But Lord Northington hated them ;—while he sat in the 
cabinet with them, he watched them with jealousy,—and at last he 
plotted, and he effected, their ruin. As they were to repeal the Ameri- 
can Stamp Act, and to censure the proceedings against Wilkes, which 
he had sanctioned, one does not’ well understand how he should have 
wished or been permitted to continue in office. But he was a “ friend” 
of the King,—and some were silly enough to think that he might secure 
to the government the royal favour and confidence. 

The Stamp Act having produced the discontents and disturbances in 
America which might have been expected from it,—much Fes. 1766 
against the King’s wishes, it was to be repealed; but to st ‘J 
mollify him, a preliminary resolution was moved, “ that Parliament had 
full power and right to make laws of sufficient force to bind the colonies.” 
When this came to be debated in the House of Peers, it was objected to by 
Lord Camden as being not only ill-timed, but as being untrue, on the 
ground that it might, in its general language, include the power and right 
to tax the colonies, which he strongly denied. ‘My Lords,” he proceeded, 
‘“‘ he who disputes the authority of any supreme legislature treads upon 
very tender ground. It is therefore necessary for me, in setting out, to 
desire that no inference may be drawn from anything I shall advance. 
I deny that the consequences of my reasoning will be, that the colonies 
can claim independence, or that they have a right to oppose acts of the 
legislature in a rebellious manner, even although the legislature has no 
right to make such acts. In my opinion, my Lords, the legislature has no 
right to make this law. The sovereign authority, the omnipotence of 
the legislature, is a favourite doctrine, but there are some things which 
you cannot do. You cannot enact anything against the Divine law. 
You cannot take away any man’s private property, without making 
him a compensation. You have no right to condemn any man by bill 
of attainder without hearing him. But though the Parliament cannot 
take any man’s private property, yet every subject must make contri- 
bution : and this he consents to do by his representative. Notwith- 
standing the King, Lords, and Commons could in ancient times tax 
other persons, they never could tax the clergy.” He then goes on to 
consider the case of the counties palatine, of Wales, and of Berwick, 
showing that they never were taxed by Parliament till they sent repre- 
sentatives to the House of Commons; observing, that the Irish tax 


* 19 St. Tr. 1177-1236. 


176 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


themselves, and that the English Parliament could not fax them. ‘ But,” 
said he, “¢ even supposing that the Americans have no exclusive right to tax 
themselves, it would be good policy to give it them, instead of offensively 
asserting a power which you ought never to have exercised. America 
feels that she can do better without us than we can without her.” This 
was Lord Camden’s first speech in the house of Lords. 

Lord Northington, leaving the woolsack, commenced in a tone most 
insulting to the new Peer, and what was much worse, most insulting to 
the people of America,—Benjamin Franklin being a listener below the 
bar. Said he, ‘I did not intend to trouble your Lordships in this de- 
bate, but hearing doctrines laid down so new, so unmaintainable, so un- 
constitutional, so mischievous, I cannot sit silent. Such paradoxes are 
the result of a heated imagination, accompanied by a facility of utterance 
and readiness of language. The noble and learned Lord lays it down 
that the Americans have an exclusive right to impose taxes on them- 
selves. He is to lay down the law for them, and the British Parliament 
is not to interfere with them. With great submission to the noble and 
learned Lord, I believe that all except himself will admit that every go- 
vernment can arbitrarily impose laws on all its subjects ; there must be 
a supreme dominion in every state, whether monarchical, aristocratical, 
democratical, or mixed: to that sapreme dominion all must bend. The 
noble and learned Lord has endeavoured to distinguish between the civil 
power of government and its casuistical power. Every legislature ought 
to make laws for the safety and the benefit of the whole: but, my Lords, 
suppose they rake a law contrary to this principle, a resistance to such 
law is atthe risk of life and fortune.” After touching upon the power totax 
the clergy, and the other illustrations introduced, he proceeded : ** My 
Lords, | seek for the liberty and constitution of this kingdom no farther 
back than the Revolution: there I make my stand; and in the reign of 
King William an act passed avowing the power of this legislature 
over the colonies, As to the expediency of carrying the Stamp Act 
into execution, does the noble and learned Lord mean that the King 
has a dispensing or suspending power? The King is sworn by bis 
coronation oath to execute all the laws of this realm. Then the noble 
and learned Lord would get rid of it by a repeal,—but if you should 
concur with his Lordship in the expediency of a repeal, you will tell 
twelve millions of your subjects of Great Britain and Ireland, that you 
prefer to them the colonists who have got rich under their protection, 
and you will soon have these colonists at your doors, not merely 
besieging you as now with petitions, but using the ‘argumentum bacu- 
linum.’ What, my Lords, have these favourite Americans done ? 
They have called a meeting of their States, and then have entered into 
resolutions by which, in my opinion, they have forfeited all their charters. 
But, my Lords, the nature of the Stamp Act seems to be mistaken, It 
binds all the colonies to contribute to the expense of the general govern- 
ment incurred in defending them, but it does not control the power each 
province has to lay internal taxes for local purposes. How could the 
Americans have acquired the exemption which they claim? If all the 


LIFE OF LORD NORTHINGTON. 177 


great lawyers in Westminster Hall should give an opinion that the 
King could grant the territory of North America, none could say that 
the King could put the grantees out of their subjection to the swmmum 
imperium of Great Britain. My Lords, the colonies are become too 
big to be governed by the laws they at first set out with. They have, 
therefore, run into confusion, and it will be the policy of this country to 
form a plan of laws for them. If they withdraw allegiance, you must 
withdraw protection ; and then the little state of Genoa or of San Marino 
may soon overrun them,”* 

This coarse invective, the first of the sort delivered in Parliament 
against ‘ the Rebels,” though sure to gratify the King and the * King’s 
friends,” was so very indiscreet, and was so evidently calculated to pro- 
duce resentment and resistance on the other side of the Atlantic, that 
not only Lord Rockingham and his Whig colleagues were appalled by 
it, but it gave uneasiness to all moderate ‘Tories who had approved of 
the Stamp Act, and were still desirous of supporting it. 

Lord Mansfield immediately followed, in the hope of repairing or 
mitigating the mischief; and, notwithstanding his habitual self-com- 
mand, was unable to conceal his mortification. Thus he gently dis- 
claimed the diatribe of the Chancellor: ‘I stand up, my Lords, to 
bring your Lordships to the question before you, which is, whether the 
proposition enunciated by the noble Duke} as to our right to make 
laws to bind the colonies is, according to what appears from our law 
and history, true, or not true? It is out of the question whether it 
was, or was not, expedient to pass the law; whether it be, or be not, 
expedient to repeal it. Out of this question, too, are the rules which 
are to guide the legislature in making a law. This law is made, and 
the question is, whether you had a right to make it?” Without far- 
ther reference to the Chancellor, he then goes on, with great calmness, 
and with arguments to which I have never been able to find an answer, 
to deny, as far as the power is concerned, the distinction between a 
law to tax and a law for any other purpose. The resolution was 
agreed to, but this debate marred the effect of the repeal of the Stamp 
Act, and gave a great “ shake” to the Rockingham administration, by 
showing that their conciliatory policy was distasteful to the Court. 

The Lord Chancellor seems to have remained quiet for the rest of 
the session, and not even to have spoken when the House of Lords, 
very properly, rejected the bill passed by the Commons, declaring 
‘“« General Warrants” to be illegal ; leaving this question to be decided: 
(as it was satisfactorily) by the Courts of Common Law. 

Soon after the prorogation, it was evident that a political crisis was. 
at hand. ‘The immediate cause of the dismission of 
the ministry is attributed to an intrigue of the Lord Llee Fe kt Aba 
Chancellor Northington, who had long contemplated their feeble state,. 
and meditated their overthrow.t He had now personal as well as. 


* 16 Parl. Hist. 161-177. 
+ The Duke of Grafton, who moved the Resolution. { 1 Adolphus, 225, 
VOL. V. 12 


178 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


courticr-like reasons for wishing that there might be a revolution in the 
cabinet. Those legs, of which he had taken such bad care in his 
youth, refused to carry the Chancellor any longer between the wool- 
sack and the bar, and he was desirous of making the repose which 
they demanded as comfortable as possible. His attacks of gout had 
been of late so frequent and severe, that he found he could not longer 
hold the Great Seal; yet he was unwilling to retire into private life, 
and he thought that, in taking an active part in forming a new admi- 
nistration, he should be able to make a good bargain for himself. It 
may seem strange that he hoped to accomplish his object under the 
auspices of Mr, Pitt, who had been so odious at Court after his quarrel 
with Lord Bute, and had expressed a strong opinion against taxing 
America. But here begins the period of the life of that most illustrious 
patriot which is the least to his credit. Piqued that there should be a 
Whig government in which he was not included,—instead of supporting 
it, he had publicly said, ** Lord Rockingham has not my confidence ;”* 
and, from his belligerent tendencies, there was an expectation that, if 
he were once in office, he might be induced to take part against the 
Americans, and to use the necessary force for subduing them, There 
is no such bond of political union as a common dislike of the minister. 
This makes all difference of principle and all past quarrels be forgotten. 
George III. and the ‘* Great Commoner” being equally desirous of get- 
ting rid of Lord Rockingham, there had been much coquetry between 
them during some months, and, for the nonce, there was actually con- 
siderable good will. Lord Northington was well aware of these reci- 
procal feelings, and determined to take advantage of them. 

The occasion which he seized for effecting his purpose was the pre- 
paration of a Code for the government of Canada. A proclamation 
had issued in 1764, by which all the laws of England were introduced 
into the French provinces, ceded by: the peace of Paris; but this rash 
experiment (as might have been foreseen) caused general discontent 
and confusion. The papers relating to the disputes had, according to 
custom, been laid before the Attorney and Solicitor-General—most able 
men—Charles Yorke and De Grey—and they had prepared a very 
masterly report for the consideration of the cabinet—proposing to leave 
to the natives their ancient rights of property and civil laws, and to 
temper the rigour of their criminal procedure by the more equitable 
and: liberal system of English jurisprudence, Soon after the com- 
mencement of the recess a cabinet was called to consider this report, 
and the Chancellor being confined by a fit of the gout, the meeting took 
forx 4; 1766.) ach at his house in Lincoln’s nn Fields. Contrary 

o his good-humoured and courteous, though blunt 
and careless manner, he was exceedingly cross and peevish on this 
occasion, and found fault with every body and every thing. He com- 
plained that he had been slighted in the affair by Mr. Attorney and 


* Lord Rockingham’s position, at this time, bears a considerable resemblance to 
that of Mr. Canning in 1827, when the ultra Tories and Lord Grey coalesced to 
eject him. 


LIFE OF LORD NORTHINGTON. 179 


Mr. Solicitor ; he bitterly criticised and abused their performance ; and 
he concluded by giving an opinion that no proposition on the subject 
could be sanctioned by the cabinet until they had procured a complete 
digest of all the existing laws of Canada,—which would occasion a 
delay of at least a whole year. His colleagues believed that his way- 
wardness proceeded from the bodily anguish he was suffering, and the 
meeting broke up without coming to any definitive resolution. Next 
day he refused to attend another cabinet (as they still supposed) from 
his great toe being more painful. The rest of the ministers considering 
the matter very pressing,—that there might not be disturbances at 
Quebec, as well as at Boston, held two more meetings without him at 
the Duke of Richmond’s house at Whitehall. The Attorney-General, 
who had taken the chief part in framing the Report, being summoned 
to attend, gave ample information on the principles by which he was 
guided, and proposed that it should be sent to Quebec for the in- 
spection and consideration of Governor Carleton and the Colonial crown 
lawyers, with instructions to return it corrected, according to their 
judgment, so that it might be in all respects suited to the circumstances 
and feelings of the province. Every difficulty seemed obviated. In 
consequence Lord Egremont, in whose department the business more 
immediately was, and who had recommended the summoning of the 
Attorney and Solicitor-General, went out of town, declaring his wil- 
lingness to confide his judgment to their decision. 
Mr. Attorney, thinking all his cares over till the mor- de tried AD 
row of All Souls, and the re-assembling of Parliament should again 
make him wish that he could be divided into ten portions to be working 
in ten places at once,—retired into the country to enjoy the repose of 
the long vacation. 

But the Lord Chancellor, when he heard at night of this last meeting 
of the Cabinet, loudly exclaimed, “By G—, they shall never meet 
again.” Next morning, repairing to Richmond, he informed the King 
‘that the Ministers could not go on, and that at all events he himself 
must resign the Great Seal, and would attend Cabinet Councils with 
Lord Rockingham no longer.” He concluded by advising his Majesty 
to send for Mr. Pitt,—holding out hopes that there was a change in 
him, and that he might now be found more pliant and accommodating. 
The King, without considering too curiously what might follow, being 
delighted with the prospect of getting rid of the men who had ee 
the ‘Stamp Act, and had induced Parliament to condemn the proceed- 
ings against Wilkes, very willingly adopted this advice, and they 
manufactured the following letter to ‘* the Great Commoner :” 


“Richmond Lodge, July 7, 1766. 
“ Mr. Pitt, 

“Your very dutiful and handsome conduct the last summer makes 
me desirous of having your thoughts how an able and dignified ministry 
may be formed. I desire, therefore, you will come for this salutary 
purpose to town, 


180 REIGN OF GEORGE IIL 


‘“‘T cannot conclude without expressing how entirely my ideas con- 
cerning the basis on which a new administration should be erected are 
consonant to the opinion you gave on that subject in Parliament a few 
days before you set out for Somersetshire.* 

‘“‘] convey this through the channel of the Earl of Northington ; as 
there is no man in my service on whom I so thoroughly rely, and who 
[ know agrees with me so perfectly in the contents of this letter, 

‘‘ GrorcE R.” 


As soon as Lord Northington arrived in town he forwarded the 
royal missive, accompanied by the following communication from him- 
self : 


* London, July 7, 1766. 
“Sir, 

‘“‘T have the King’s command to convey to you his Majesty’s note 
inclosed; and as [ am no stranger to the general contents, I cannot 
help adding that I congratulate you very sincerely on so honourable and 
so gracious a distinction. 

‘“‘[ think myself very happy in being the channel of conveying what 
I think doth you so much honour, and I am persuaded will tend to the 
ease and happiness of so amiable and respectable a Sovereign, and to 
the advantage of this distracted kingdom, 

‘* [t is the duty of my office to attend in London, (though my health 
requires air and the country). If therefore, on your arrival, you want 
any information, I shall be very ready and willing to afford you all I 
can. 

‘| have the honour to be, with great respect, 

“ Dear Sir, 
‘* Your most obedient, 
‘* Most humble Servant, 
‘“* NoRTHINGTON.” 


Mr. Pitt thus answered Lord Northington : 


“Tuesday, 10 o’clock, July 8, 1766. 

“© My Lord, | 

_ T received this morning the honour of your Lordship’s very obliging 
letter, inclosing his Majesty’s most gracious commands in writing to 
me. [am indeed unable to express what I feel of unfeigned gratitude, 
duty, and zeal, upon this most affecting occasion. I will only say, that 
the remnant of my life, body, heart, and mind, is at the direction of our 
most gracious and clement Sovereign. 

*] will hasten to town as fast as I am able, and will, on my arrival, 
take the liberty to avail myself of the very kind permission your Lord- 
ship is so good as to allow me of troubling you; in the mean time, [ 
beg leave to express, in a word, how truly sensible I am of the great 


* There is no trace of this speech anywhere to be found. 


LIFE OF LORD NORTHINGTON. 181 


honour your. Lordship does me by such favourable sentiments on my 
subject, and to assure you how proud and happy I am in receiving 
such flattering marks of friendship and confidence from your Lordship, 
Iam, &c.” 


And here is his courtly response to the King : 


“ Sire, 

‘“‘ Penetrated with the deepest sense of your Majesty’s boundless 
goodness to me, and with a heart overflowing with duty and zeal for 
the honour and happiness of the most gracious and benign Sovereign, 
I shall hasten to London as fast as I possibly can,—wishing that I could 
change infirmity into wings of expedition, the sooner to be permitted 
the high honour to lay at your Majesty’s feet the poor, but sincere 
offering of the little services of 

‘Your Majesty’s 
‘* Most dutiful Subject, 
‘“‘and devoted Servant, 
‘© Witiram Pirr.” 


The particulars of the negotiation are not certainly known, but they 
may easily be conjectured from the two following letters from Lord 
Northington to Mr, Pitt: 


“London, July 14, 1766. 
“ Dear Sir, 

**T am sorry to find that you are so much out of order, and hope the 
air will speedily remove that complaint; which I trust will not be im- 
mediately felt, as, by his Majesty’s commands, I yesterday wrote to 
Earl Temple that the King desired to see him in London; and on the 
other side you will see his answer, received since I began this page. I 
desire to know when you go to Hampstead ; as, if occasion requires, 
I may be able to communicate accordingly. 

‘“*] will apprise the King of your unlucky situation ; who was so well 
satisfied with your dutiful behaviour as to feel it accordingly. I am 
with great respect, &c.” 


“Sunday, 5 p. M., July 20, 1766. 
“ Dear Sir, 

‘“‘ Having seen his Majesty after the drawing-room to-day, I now sit 
down to answer your very obliging letter ; which, as far as it related 
to myself, I could not before do. 

‘“‘'The invidious share I have taken in the present business was the 
result of my sensible feeling for my most gracious Master, and this 
great commercial and brave country, with which I thought nothing 
could stand in competition. I therefore determined not to be considerate 
of myself in any respect, but to stand forth as a public servant, or re- 
tire a private man, as either should contribute to the King’s service. 


182 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


‘¢ As I suppose you might speak with regard to me in the same style 
of partial consideration to the King you did to myself, I found’ his 
Majesty very desirous that I should take a great office in his adminis- 
tration, to which I assented, and to that you so kindly pointed out. 
Though no office is so personally inviting as that [ am now in, yet is 
true what I urged that my health cannot sustain the Chancery, the 
woolsack, and state affairs. I need not, afier what I said to you, say 
that the succession of Lord Camden will be most agreeable to myself. 
Your own thoughts respecting yourself have my full concurrence in, 
and approbation of, their propriety, and the other persons mentioned 
have all due respect from me. | 

‘¢T shall only add, that if you lend your advice, as also your reputa- 
tion, and the rest of the administration act with cordiality and resolu- 
tion (from me you shall have the fullest support I can give), I see no 
difficulties to frighten men. 

‘*¢T should have made you another visit after I had seen Lord Tem- 
ple; but I know, in general, how unseasonable visits are to invalids. 
If you are well enough, I would call at your most convenient hour to- 
morrow. I have the honour to be, with the greatest respect, dear Sir, 

‘* Your most obedient, 
“and most humble Servant, 
‘¢ NORTHINGTON.” 


The Chancellor had been the bearer of a communication from the 
King to Lord Temple, asking him to take office ; but his terms could not 
be acceded to,—and without his co-operation was formed an admini- 
stration the most fantastical in its construction, and the most whimsical 
in its proceedings, of any to be found in our annals.* 

Lord Northington went through the formal ceremony of resigning 
the Great Seal, into his Majesty’s hands, at St. James’s Palace, on 
Wednesday, the 30th of July, 1766, and was at the same time declared 
by his Majesty PresipeENT oF THE CouNcIL, with many gracious 
acknowledgments of his faithful services. 


* The following is Horace Walpole’s account of Lord Northington’s breaking up 
the Rockingham administration : ‘On the 7th of July, the Chancellor went into the 
King, and declared he would resign—a notification he had not deigned to make to 
the ministers, but which he took care they should know by declaring openly what 
he had done. When the ministers saw the King, he said, coolly, ‘Then I must see 
what I can do.’?”—Memoirs of King George IIL, vol. ii. 334. Sir Denis Le Mar- 
chant, the learned editor of this work, says: “ Lord Northington’s health, and his 
frequent disagreements with his colleagues, had for some months made him desirous 
of an honourable and quiet retreat. There is no doubt, both from his own letters 
and the traditions still extant at the bar, that his habits of hard labour and extreme 
conviviality, had by this time undermined his constitution much to the deterioration 
of his temper; and he, perhaps, suspected slights that were never intended. More- 
over, the scrupulous sense of public duty, the natural reserve and strict propriety of 
deportment which characterized Lord Rockingham and Mr. Conway, were by no 
means to his taste. He must have felt even less easy with such associates than his 
successor Lord Thurlow did in a later day with Mr. Pitt; and, like him, his usual 
course in the cabinet was to originate nothing, and to oppose everything. The 
commercial treaty with Russia, a measure of unquestionable benefit, nearly fell to 


LIFE OF LORD NORTHINGTON, 183 


CHAPTER CXLI. 
CONCLUSION OF THE LIFE OF LORD NORTHINGTON. 


My Lord President and Ex-chancellor Northington, while labouring 
for the public good,—in the new arrangements was not forgetful of 
what was due to himself. As an indemnity for his sacrifice of the 
Great Seal, it was agreed that, in addition te the salary of his present 
office, he should receive an immediate pension of 20002. a year; that 
on his resignation of this office the pension should be raised to 40002, a 
year; and that he should have a reversionary grant of the office of 
clerk of the Hanaper in Chancery for two lives, after the death of the 
Duke of Chandos, 

Although Lord Northington held a high appointment at the commence- 
ment of this motley administration, his connexion with it was fleeting, 
and this is not the place to tell of the mortification, failure, and eclipsed 
fame of the ** Great Commoner,” become Earl of Chatham,—when he 
found himself, from physical and mental infirmity, unable to control the 
discordant materials of which he had thought fit to compound his new 
Cabinet.* 

The only measure of the government in which Lord Northington 
took any part, was the embargo to prohibit the exportation of corn ; 
and here he exhibited his characteristic rashness and recklessness,— 
which seemed to ‘be aggravated by age and experience. 

On account of the almost unprecedented succession of wet weather 
in the summer and autumn of 1766, the harvest had failed in many 
parts of England, the price of bread had risen alarmingly, and a famine 
was apprehended, A foolish proclamation was issued against ‘“ fore- 
stallers and regraters,” which not increasing the quantity of corn, nor 
lessening the demand for it,—in as far as it had any operation, aggra- 
vated the evil by interfering with the operations of commerce. An 
order was then made by the King in Council, in which Lord Chatham, 
though absent, concurred, prohibiting the exportation of corn, and lay- 


the ground owing to his unreasonable and obstinate opposition. He would rarely 
listen to remonstrances from his colleagues ; and was on such cold terms with them, 
as probably justified him in his own mind in breaking up the cabinet so unceremo- 
niously. He was too fearless to stoop to intrigue; and there was no necessity for 
it on this occasion.” 

* Lord Northington, from the time of his appointment as Lord President, fre- 
quently corresponded with the Duke of Grafton, who was at the head of the Trea. 
sury. Being at the Grange in September, 1766, he writes to him: “I have not 
spent my time here without regard to my new employment, having perused the 
papers whith I brought down here, and which have been long in arrear. Lam 
sorry Lord Chatham is laid up; and shall only add that I think no journey incon- 
venient which tends to the King’s service, ‘or to express the great personal regard 
with which I am,—My dear Lord,” &c. 


184 REIGN OF GEORGE IIL 


ing an embargo on ships loaded with cargoes of corn about to sail for 
foreign countries, where the scarcity was still more severe. Although 
it probably would have been wiser to have left the trade in food entirely 
free, without duty or bounty, the measure was generally approved of, 
and the government was actuated by the best motives in resorting to it. 
Still it was contrary to law; for there was no statute to prevent the 
exportation of any sort of grain, however high the price might be, or to 
authorize the Crown to interfere on such an occasion. ‘Those con- 
cerned in the embargo were therefore liable to actions, and required 
to be indemnified. This was the rational view of the subject taken by 
Lord Chatham himself in his maiden speech in the House of Lords, on 
a3 the first day of the ensuing session. He said, ‘ it was 
[Nov. 1766.] 5 
an act of power which, during the recess of Parliament 
was justifiable on the ground of necessity ;” and he read a passage from 
Locke on Government, to show that, * although not strictly speaking 
legal, the measure was right’ in the opinion of that great friend of 
liberty, that constitutional philosopher, and that liberal statesman.” 
Upon this footing a bill of indemnity would have passed without diffi- 
culty. But Lord Northington, for some unintelligible reason, contended 
that the measure was strictly legal, and that no indemnity was neces- 
sary.* He went so far as to maintain that the Crown had a right to 
interfere even against a positive act of Parliament, and that proof of the 
necessity amounted to a legal justification, Seemingly unconscious 
that he was standing up for a power in the Crown to suspend or dispense 
with all laws, he defied any lawyer to contradict him, and saying ‘ he 
was no patron of the people,” he even went on to throw out a sarcasm 
against the noble Earl, now at the head of the government, for his past 
popular courses. 
Lord Mansfield, never displeased with an opportunity of chastising 
Lord Northington, clearly showed that the power he claimed for the 
Crown was utterly inconsistent with the constitution, and if it ever in 
any degree existed, was entirely at variance both with the letter and 
the spirit of the Bill of Rights.t 
The Ex-chancellor, though, to the amazement of mankind, counte- 
nanced by a great constitutional lawyer, who was expected to scout 
such absurd doctrine, never seems to have rallied from this downset. 
I cannot discover that he again opened his mouth in Parliament, 
although he continued sulkily in office till the close of the following 
year. Finding that, in the absence of Lord Chatham, there were 


* The inconsiderate manner in which he had originally agreed to the measure, 
may be learned from an extract of his letter to the Duke of Grafton, dated 31st 
August, 1766. “I come now to that part of your Grace’s letter which more imme- 
diately relates to my office; the revival of the prohibition of the exportation of corn, 
by order of council, pursuant to the late act—which I have not here. And I am of 
opinion, that it is absolutely fit and necessary, as I stand at present informed.” In 
truth, the order was directly contrary to the late act; and the President of the 
Council advises an order, supposed to be framed on an act which he does not see, 
and with which he is wholly unacquainted! Surely, we are less slovenly nowadays 
in our mode of transacting public business. 


t 16 Parl. Hist. 245-313, 


LIFE OF LORD NORTHINGTON. 185 


dreadful distractions in the cabinet, and that he had no weight there, he 
soon become desirous of retreating to the quiet enjoyment of his pen- 
sions and his sinecures. 

He communicated his wish to resign to the Duke of Grafton, and 
they sent a joint representation to Lord Chatham, pointing out “ the 
present state of the King’s affairs from the want of his Lordship’s sup- 
port and influence, and from the unfortunate situation of his Lordship’s 
health,—the administration having been rested, ab enztio, on his Lord- 
ship’s weight and abilities.” They seemed to have received a very 
rough answer from him, as we may conjecture from the following note, 
addressed by Lord Northington to the Duke of Grafton : 


*¢ My dear Lord, 

*<[ have the properest sense of your Grace’s communication of a 
letter, most extraordinary, and, as relative to our- [May 29, 1767.] 
selves, most absurd as well as dangerous. My 
sentiments must remain as they were, in justice to my own honour, my 
duty to the King and the public, and the peace and quiet of my own 
mind. I have the honour to be, with the greatest respect,” é&c. 


While Lord Northington’s resignation was under consideration, he 
paid his respects at St. James’s, and then sent to the Duke the following 
account of his reception : 


“My dear Lord, 

“T was this morning at Court, and had the honour of speaking 
to * at the drawing-room, but as he had no [June 11, 1767.] 
commands for me, and several persons of ministry 
going in, I did not trouble the closet. But I thought it fit to signify to 
your Grace, that I am convinced, from circumstances, that it is wished 
by many to pause till after the session is up. And I could perceive, 
by the discourse of a noble neighbour of mine, that the thing you are 
inquiring after is as extensive as I thought it, and too large for your re- 
ception. The many alluded to above are not of our friends, and it 
being my permanent opinion that we should penetrate through the 
present cloud, I send this for your better and cooler judgment. 

“The SY was beginning a long account of the state of America, &c. 
&c. Butin the midst of this hurlothumbo they were called both in, 
stayed a long time in the closet, and I left them there. . . . My Lord, 
the affection I bear to your Grace’s sentiments, honour, and abilities 
(and you know I can speak on this occasion only from truth), has 
induced me to suggest every material circumstance relative to vour 
Grace’s conduct in this nice and important crisis, and if my friendship 
outruns my judgment, I am confident that I shall not only receive your 
pardon, but thanks for my warmth in endeavouring to express myself, 


—My dear Lord, 





‘ Your Grace’s,” &c. 


* Word illegible. 


186 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


Lord Northington was induced to delay his resignation, and to retreat 
into'the country,—whence he wrote a letter tov the Duke, in which, after 
expressing his satisfaction at having been present when his: son was 
unanimously elected for Hampshire, he says: ‘“ though the air and re- 

tirement have afforded me some ease, the weather hath 
[Juny 9, 1767.] . . : 

as yet debarred me of any relief. I barely walk, and 
am without strength or appetite. ‘Though I was not surprised that your 
Grace received no satisfaction in the information you inquired after, 
yet I lament it, as it daily confirms what I have long suspected, that the 
rancour and intoxication of faction would sap the very foundations of 
government. The contagion is so widely spread that it is beyond me 
to know whither to turn to avoid it. I hope, however, your next may 
afford me more comfort, as | am sensible of your Grace’s discernment 
to discover, and zeal to pursue, every avenue that may open and lead 
to the stability of your King and country.” 

A few days after, the Duke wrote to him an enormously lengthy des- 
patch, giving him an account of negotiations with the Duke of Bedford, 
[Jury 18, 1767.] See Conway, Lord Loge Lord Rockingham, &c., 

and thus concluding, “ one favour I must entreat of 
your Lordship, who, considering the consequences it is of to the public, 
must not refuse—which is, though out of office, to assist the cabinet, and 
particularly myself, with the advice which your ability and great expe- 
rience in public affairs will make so essential to the King’s service.” In 
his answer, Lord Northington says : 

“‘T think myself much obliged to your Grace for communicating to 

me in so clear and historical a manner, the progress 
ae lO Tg of political matters since I left London.” After 
tedious comments on recent intrigues, and’ praising the Duke for con- 
tinuing in office, he thus concludes. ‘ As to myself, my Lord, J thought 
it my duty frankly to open my state of health, and its insufficiency to 
an office so extensive, and of so much attendance. It was but just both 
to the King and to his ministers, as I was, and am morally certain I 
shall never re-establish my strength to sustain that burden, but I desire 
to be laid at the King’s feet as one that out of office will be as zealous as 
in—and as one that will ever to the best of his abilities support his Ma- 
jesty’s government, and, without a compliment, never with so much 
pleasure as when your Grace is at the head of it.”’* 


* The Duke, in his Journal, after setting out his own composition in extenso, thus 
proceeds: “It will be proper also to introduce here Lord Northington’s answer : 
We lived in full and mutual confidence in each other : he had about him the genuine 
principle of a Whig,’ and in all transactions I found him to be a man full of honour, 
a disinterested gentleman, and, though much devoted to the King, with great zeal 
for the constitution. As a lawyer, his knowledge and ability were great; but his 


manner and speech were ungracious. I shall ever do honour to his memory where- 
ever I hear his name brought forward.” 


* I should be curious to know the definition of a Whig, which would include Lord 


Northington, who might be a very sound politician, but was as little of a Whig as 
his successor ‘lhurlow. 


LIFE OF LORD NORTHINGTON. 187 


Being still pressed by the Duke of Grafton, in the King’s name, at 
least to defer his resignation till the administration 
might be voptamlealauiiti wrote back: ‘“‘ You are ECC RE 
pleased to open the immediate plan of carrying on government in the 
interim till a better can be formed.......J also learn from your 
Grace’s letter that in his Majesty’s present situation it is his wish, and 
your Grace seems to think it will be a convenience, that I should for a 
time retain the great employment which his Majesty, out of his abun- 
dant grace, was pleased to confer on me. [I can have but one answer to 
that, which I must entreat your Grace to lay at the King’s feet, ‘ That 
I am so sensible of the many, and never-to-be-forgotten marks of the 
King’s favour, proceeding from the greatness of his royal mind, which 
it hath been my good fortune to have received,—that [| am disposed to 
stand wherever I can be of use to his Majesty’s affairs till he can mo- 
del his administration to his best approbation,—and this, with all zeal, 
duty, cheerfulness.’ That, however, I may conceal nothing, I must in- 
form your Grace that I write this from my bed, having been yesterday 
seized with the gout in my head, which continued till within this hour, 
with exquisite pain, and is intermitted so as to enable me to write; that 
yet [ think myself better than when I left London, and hope to be able 
at no inconvenient distance, to be in London long enough to despatch 
any business that may wait me at Council. But it will be a fortnight 
before I can use my own house, and in my present state of health I 
know not where else to lodge. JI have thus answered your Grace with 
much difficulty, and with a total resignation of myself to the King’s 
commands; and I have only to add, that my wishes for and support of 
your Grace’s honour and glory, will always wait upon you.” 

The Duke of Grafton expressed great satisfaction at the prospect of 
his retaining office, and sent for his consideration a large bundle of 
papers respecting the new constitution for Canada, 
Lord eticeicn in answer said : “ My eyes would LAve? Snore 
not permit me to write to your Grace by the last post, as I intended with 
respect to the affairs of the Canada legislation, and to inform you fully 
of my ideas on that business. [ must first premise that the formation 
of any plan of that kind can never commence or proceed through the 
office that I now enjoy, in whatever hands it shall be placed; because 
the Council cannot correspond with any of the King’s officers there, to 
know the true state of that country, which correspondence resides alone 
in the Secretary of State. When such information is acquired by him, 
I am of that opinion, that before a plan can be formed, which must ne- 
cessarily have the sanction of Parliament, it is necessary to have the 
full sense of the King’s servants upon that subject, that the measures 
may have the general support of government, and not to be thrown, as 
they were last year, upon one person not in the least responsible for 
them. When every information is obtained, I am certain your Grace’s 
penetration anticipates the difficulties to be encountered, from the civil 
constitution of that province, composed of French received under a 
capitulation incorporated with English entitled to a legislation at some 


188 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


time, and who have been encouraged to call for it, by the proclamation, 
the King’s commission, and other excitements. ‘To this as great a dif- 
ficulty succeeds with regard to a Popish hierarchy, and, of course, a 
Protestant one; both of which are, in my opinion, delicate subjects : 
loads too heavy to be sustained by any strength less than that of a con- 
curring administration. I have all along been of this opinion in diffe- 
rent administrations, and have been willing to lend my aid to this diffi- 
cult task. I hope to be able to be in London in about ten days, though 
Iam very indifferent still.’’* 

Lord Northington accordingly came to town and remained there a 
few days; but, from a fresh access of his disorder he was soon again 
obliged to retire to the Grange, where he experienced a little respite from 
his sufferings. 

At last, on the 23d of December, 1767, at his earnest entreaty, his 
resignation was accepted, and Granville Levison Earl Gower was ap- 
pointed President of the Council in his stead. 

Being relieved from the anxieties of office, he rallied considerably, 
although it had been thought that his last hour was at hand. In the 
course of the following year he was so much better that an effort was 
made to induce him to re-enter the cabinet. The Duke of Grafton says, 
in his Journal :—* Hoping that Lord Northington might have considered 
himself still equal in health to the business of the Privy Seal, his Ma- 
jesty, in the first instance, made the offer to his Lordship, but which he 
declined on reasons which were very satisfactory to the King.” 

The Premier still continued to consult him on public affairs. The 
following is the last letter of his in my possession, and expresses his 
sentiments characteristically on the subject of the Middlesex election, 
which now intensely agitated the public mind: 


“ Grainge, 10 Dec. 1769. 
‘“‘ My Lord, 

‘<T had the honour of your Grace’s by last Sunday’s post. I was 
that day attacked by the gout, and not able to write till now. I am not 
surprised your Grace expresseth so strong a feeling of the distraction of 
the times. I have long entertained the same opinion of it, and of its 
tendency so dangerous to the vitals of this valuable constitution. But, 
my Lord, the distraction hath so long raged, hath been so much fo- 
mented, and in its attack of the supreme power of the nation (the Par- 
liament I mean) so much neglected (wisely, | must suppose), that it is 
scarce decent or safe now for an individual to open his sentiments on 
the subject. Yet it is now come to that pass that it seems totally im- 
possible for the P. to meet and not vindicate its own honour. Doth it 


* It has been said, that this letter proves “ that a good Chancellor and great law- 
yer could write in the language, and with the eloquence, as well as propriety, which 
might better become a common housemaid.”—Law Review, No. 4. It is marvel- 
lous, to be sure, to observe his utter disregard of the common rules of composition. 

t Lord Henley represents that Lord Northington finally retired in June, 1767, 


(Life, 54,) but I have fixed the date by a reference to the books of the Privy 
Council, 


LIFE OF LORD NORTHINGTON. 189 


want power? Doth it want advice? Thank God the contest is there. 
Your Grace supposeth I have no idea of the backwardness and luke- 
warmness of some from whom the K. might expect advice and assist- 
ance in his difficulties. I assure your Grace I have long had an ade- 
quate one, and very just sentiments of the persons. In this situation 
your Grace wishes that I would spend the winter in London, and give 
my assistance in the House of Lords. My Lord, I have but one an- 
swer, I cannot—my health will not enable me to live there this winter, 
nor if I were there, to attend the House. But my Lord, were I able, 
could 1? What a figure should I, after the offices I have passed, make, 
prating on subjects to which I am a total stranger, and on measures in 
which I do not concur, and about doctrines I know not how adopted. 
Passive obedience to—a mob! JI should, so circumstanced, hurt the 
service that I have a zeal for,—embarrass your Grace, whom I really 
honour. Believe me, my Lord, there is nothing to debate upon,—oPor- 
TET AGERE. 

** Indeed, my dear Lord, I am advanced in years—my constitution so 
impaired, that unless I can acquire more strength, must be content to 
remain the retired, unimportant thing I am, BS 

‘In whatever condition, I profess myself to be with equal truth and 
respect, 

“¢ My dear Lord,” &c. 


During his intervals of ease from his terrible enemy, the gout, he 
amused himself with making deputy lieutenants, (Dec. 10, 1769.] 
militia officers, and justices of the peace, and getting 
his old friends round him,—whom he entertained with old port and old 
stories. 

He sunk gradually under his infirmities. When near his end he was 
reminded of the propriety of his receiving the consolations of religion, 
and he readily agreed that a divine should be sent for; but when the 
Right Rev. Dr. , with whom he had formerly been intimate, was 
proposed, he said, ‘* No! that won’t do. I cannot well confess to him, 
for the greatest sin I shall have to answer for was making him a 
Bishop !” The clergyman of the parish was substituted, and the dying 
Ex-chancellor joined in the ceremonies prescribed by the Church for such 
a solemn occasion with edifying humility and devotion. Having, in 
characteristic language, tenderly taken leave of his weeping daughters, 
he expired on the 14th of January, 1772, in the 64th year of his age. 
His remains were interred in the church at Northington, where is to 
be seen a monument, 





“Sacred to the Memory of 
Rosert Hentey, first Earl of Northington ; 
Janx, Countess of Northington, his Wife, 
And of Rosert, Earl of Northington, their only surviving Son.” 
The inscription, after warmly praising the virtues of all the three, 
thus concludes :— 


“This monument is erected, as a tribute of respect and affection to their parenta 


190 CHARACTER OF 


and their brother, by the R. H. Lady Bridget Tollemache, the R. H. Lady Jane 
Aston, Mary Viscountess Wentworth, and the R. H. Lady Elizabeth Eden.” 

His children may well be excused for piously recording their opinion 
of the ‘consummate ability” as well as “ inflexible integrity,” with 
which he discharged the duties of all the offices which he filled, but the 
impartial biographer is obliged to form a more discriminating estimate 
of his merit. 

Endowed with good natural abilities, and possessing very amiable 
qualities, he was a mere lawyer, seeking only his own advancement, 
and, though unstained by crimes,—unembellished by genius or by 
liberal accomplishments—nor very solicitous about the public welfare 
or even his own fame. 

Much praise has been bestowed upon him for consistency as a_poli- 
tician. He certainly was always very faithful to Leicester House, and 
to the clique called the ‘* King’s Friends,” which sprang out of that 
connexion. But it is difficult to say what the principles were by which 
he is supposed to have been guided. He seems never to have origi- 
nated any of the measures of his political associates, but to have been 
always ready in a very zealous manner to defend such as they favoured. 
He turned out a strong Tory and coercionist, but 1 apprehend that he 
would have been as strong a Whig and reconciliationist if the liberal 
side had been taken by Lord Bute and George III. During the Rock- 
ingham administration he could only be considered a spy in the enemy’s 
camp. 

He is much more respectable as a Judge. He was not only above 
all suspicion of corruption or partiality, but, though by no means a 
profound jurist, his mind was well imbued with the principles of our 
municipal law; he disposed very satisfactorily of the routine business 
of his Court, and he could do considerable justice to any important 
question which arose before him. His judgments are at least remark- 
ably clear, and if they have not the depth they are free from the ver- 
bosity and tortuosity of Lord Eldon’s, which, dwelling so minutely 
upon the peculiarities of each case, often leave us in doubt how he has 
disposed of the points argued before him, and what general rule he 
means to establish. I do not think that the number of decrees reversed 
on appeal can be adopted as a criterion of the merits of a Chancellor ; 
and had Lord Northington been raised to the peerage when he received 
the Great Seal, and had he, like Lord Hardwicke, been the only law 
Lord, he might possibly have received the same character for infalli- 
bility. But, independently of the decisions of the House of Lords 
against him, the printed reports confirm the tradition, that his boldness 
in declaring his opinion was not quite equalled by his care and caution 
in forming it. He may, perhaps, be advantageously contrasted with 
Judges we have read of, who, desperately afraid of committing them- 
selves,—that they may keep out of scrapes, defer giving judgment till 
both parties are ruined. 

[ am sorry that [ can say nothing for him as a law reformer. But, 
although he never dreamed of making any attempt to render proceed- 


LORD NORTHINGTON. 191 


ings in the Court of Chancery cheaper or more expeditious, or to im- 
prove any of our institutions, no peculiar blame is to be imputed to 
him, for he lived at a time when the system of optimism, graced by 
the inimitable Commentaries of Blackstone, prevailed in Westminster 
Hall, and half a century elapsed before it was doubted that appearance 
to a subpeena in Chancery must necessarily be enforced by a commis- 
sion of rebellion—that by the eternal constitution of things, Common 
Law actions must be commenced by /atttat, capias, or quo minus,— 
or that fraud and trifling violations of property must be checked by the 
multiplication of capital punishments. 

Lord Northington is said to have kept up his acquaintance with the 
‘Greek and Latin classics, and to have shown some acquaintance with 
Hebrew. He was singularly unskilled in the composition of English. 
Indeed, I can discover in him no love of literature, and I should con- 
jecture that when he had got through his official labours he devoted 
himself to convivial enjoyment or the common gossip of vulgar life. 
He not only never aimed at authorship, but I do not find that, like 
Camden, Thurlow, or Wedderburn, he associated with literary men or 
with artists, 

His great delight was to-find himself in a circle of lawyers or com- 
mon-place politicians, and to indulge in boisterous mirth and coarse 
jocularity. He seems himself to have possessed a rich fund of humour, 
Many of his sayings and stories used to be repeated by young students, 
when 


*T' was merry in the hall, 
And beards wagged all, 


but would not be found suited to the more refined taste of the present 
age.* He likewise indulged in a bad habit which seems to have been 
formerly very general, and which I recollect when it was expiring—of 
interlarding conversation with oaths and imprecations as intensitives— 
even without any anger or excitement. 

But in spite of these faults into which he was led by the fashion of 
the times, he was a strictly moral, and evena religious man. He con- 
tinued to live on terms of the utmost affection and harmony with his 
wife, and he composed two beautiful prayers for her use—one soon 
after their marriage, and the other on the birth of their second child— 
proofs of his piety and tenderness, which she regarded with enthu- 
siasm, till the last hour of her existence, In all the domestic relations 
he deserves high commendation. He was particularly attached to his 
daughter—Lady Bridget, who, with the most perfect feminine delicacy, 
inherited his powers of humour, and was celebrated for sprightliness of 
repartee, as well as for her beauty. She was in the habit of reading 
for her father, and it is said that she could even extract amusement 
for the gay society in which she mixed, out of bills, answers, and afh- 
davits; but this must have been in ridiculing the proceedings of the 
Court, and all concerned with them. 


* I cannot even relate his compliment to the capacity of Lady Northington, or to 
the bright eyes of his daughter, Lady Bridget. 


192 LIFE OF LORD NORTHINGTON. 


Lord Northington, in his person, was a remarkably handsome man, 
of the middle size—rather thin—but till crippled by the gout, very 
active and athletic. His portrait, by Hudson, gives him a very agree- 
able expression of countenance, and represents him, when on the wool- 
sack, with a complexion still fresh and rosy, instead of being, like most 
of those who have reached this painful elevation, of the colour of the 
parchment they have pored upon—or like Mr. Surrebutter’s, in the 
Pleader’s Guide, with 


“ A certain tinge of copper 
Quite professional and proper.”’* 


He enjoyed the lawyer’s blessing, a large family—his wife having 
brought him eight children, three sons and five daughters. Only one 
son survived him, Robert, the second Earl, who was at an early age 
elected one of the members for Hampshire, and continued to represent 
that county till his father’s death. He was a great personal friend and 
political associate of Charles James Fox, and when the coalition 
ministry was formed in 1783, he was sent as Lord Lieutenant to Ire- 
land, with Mr. Wyndham for Secretary. He is said to have been likely 
to have succeeded well in this post from the frankness and popularity 
of his manners, as well as his good sense and firmness, but he was 
soon removed from it by the ascendency of the younger Pitt.t He 
afterwards died at Paris, on his return from Italy in July, 1786, and 
having never been married, the title became extinct.t 

The daughters all formed high alliances, but they all died without 
issue, except Lady Elizabeth, married to the eminent diplomatist, Sir 
Morton Eden, afterwards raised to the Irish peerage by the title of Lord 
Henley,—whose son, my most valued friend, was the editor of Lord 
Northington’s judgments, and who, having married a lady adorned 
with every grace and virtue, the sister of Sir Robert Peel, left by her a 
son, the present Lord Henley,—the representative of his great-grand- 
father, the Lord Chancellor. 


* Pleader’s Guide, Part I. Lecture vi. 

t Preface to Eden’s “ Reports,” xxix. Henley’s ‘Life of Lord Northington,” 
62-64. 

¢ The epitaph says, that “he was nominated in mpccixxxiv to the arduous and 
distinguished station of Lord Lieutenant of Ireland: where, in times very difficult, 
he manifested such talents, assiduity, and firmness, as conciliated the love and 
respect of the nation over which he presided, and gained him the approbation and 
esteem of his sovereign and his country.” 


LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN. 193 


CHAPTER CXLII. 


LIFE OF LORD CHANCELLOR CAMDEN FROM HIS BIRTH TILL THE 
DEATH OF GEORGE II, 


I now enter on a most pleasing task. The subject of the following 
memoir was one of the brightest ornaments of my profession, and of my 
party, for 1 glory like him in the name of Whig, although, I hope, I 
have never been reluctant to point out the errors of Whigs, or to praise 
Tory talent, honour, and consistency. From some of the opinions of 
Lord Camden I must differ, and I cannot always defend his conduct ; 
but he was a profound jurist, and an enlightened statesman,—his charac- 
ter was stainless in public and in private life,—when raised to elevated 
Station, he continued true to the principles which he had early avowed 
—when transferred to the House of Peers, he enhanced his fame as an 
assertor of popular privileges,—when an Ex-chancellor, by a steady co- 
operation with his former political associates, he conferred greater bene- 
fits on his country, and had still a greater share of public admiration 
and esteem, than while he presided on the woolsack,—when the preju- 
dices of the Sovereign and of the people of England produced civil war, 
his advice would have preserved the integrity of the empire—when 
America, by wanton oppression, was for ever lost to us, his efforts 
mainly contributed to the pacification with the new republic,—and 
Englishmen, to the latest generations, will honour his name for having 
secured personal freedom, by putting an end to arbitrary arrests under 
general warrants, for having established the constitutional rights of 
juries, and for having placed on an imperishable basis the liberty of the 
press. 

Charles Pratt, afterwards Lord Chancellor and Earl Camden, was 
descended from a respectable gentleman’s family that had been long 
settled at Careswell Priory, near Collumpton, in Devonshire. The first 
distinguished member of it was his father, Sir John Pratt, who was an 
eminent barrister in the reigns of William III. and Queen Anne,— 
gained considerable reputation by supporting the Whigs in the House 
of Commons as representative for Midhurst,—at the accession of George 
]. was appointed a puisne Judge of the King’s Bench, and in 1718 suc- 
ceeded Lord Macclesfield as Chief Justice of that Court. The most 
famous decision in his time was respecting the right of a widow who 
had married a foreigner to claim parochial relief after his death from 
the parish in which she was born—thus reported in Sir James Bur- 
row : 

“ A woman having a settlement 
Married a man with none, 
The question was, he being dead, 


If what she had was gone? 
VOL, V. 13 


194 LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN. 


“ Quoth Sir John Pratt, the settlement 
Suspended did remain 
Living the husband, but him dead, 
It doth revive again.” 
Chorus of puisne Judges. ——* but him dead, 
It doth revive again,””* 

He likewise drew upon himself a great share of public attention by 
the able manner in which he conducted the trial of the famous 
Christopher Layer for high treason,t and by his decided opinion in 
favour of George I. respecting the Sovereiyn’s control over the educa- 
tion and marriage of his grandchildren.f 

He was twice married and had a very numerous family. Charles 
was the third son by the second wife, daughter of the Reverend Hugh 
Wilson, a canon of Bangor, and was born in the last year of the reign 
of Queen Anne. Of his boyhood little is recorded, except that, from 
his quickness and love of reading, he was considered a lad of promise, 
and that, from his cheerful and affectionate temper, he was a great 
favourite among his companions, 

When only ten years old he had the misfortune to lose his father ; 
but this was probably the remote cause of his future eminence. While 
he was studying the law, and young at the bar, the run of the house of 
the Chief Justice of England, with the chance of sinecure appointments, 
would have been very agreeable, but would probably have left him in 
the obscure herd to which the sons of Chancellors and Chief Justices 
have usually belonged. His mother intimated to him that the, small 
amount of his patrimony would do little more than, with good manage- 
ment, defray the expense of his education, and that by his own exertions 
he must make his way in the world. 

He was soon after sent to Eton, and on account of the reduced 
circumstances of his family, he was placed upon the foundation. But 
in those days the collegers and oppidans were on the most friendly 
footing, and here he formed a friendship which lasted through life, and 
not only led to his advancement, but was of essential benefit to the state 
—with William Pitt,—then flogged for breaking bounds—afterwards 
the ** Great Commoner” and Eart or Cuatruam. He likewise had for 
his playmates Lyttleton and Horace Walpole. At that time, as now, 
Eton, from its many temptations and gentle discipline, was very ill 
adapted to a boy idly inclined; yet it was the best school of manly 
manners, and in the studious genius of the place fanned the flame of 
emulation, and inspired a lasting love of classic lore. Fortunately, 
young Pratt was eminent in the latter category, and here not only was 
his taste refined, but from his lessons in Livy, and a stealthy perusal 
of Claudian, he imbibed that abhorrence of arbitrary power which ani- 
mated him through life, : 

At the election in July, 1731, he got “ King’s,” and in the following 

[Ocr. 1781.] on he went to reside at Cambridge. Being from his 
earliest years destined by his father to the bar, he had 


* Burr. Sett. Cas.; Burn’s Just. tit. “* Settlement.” 7-16 St. Tr.93, 
t15 St. Tr. 1195. 


LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN. 195 


previously been entered of the Society of the Inner Temple.* While 
at the university he did not much meddle with the mathematical pursuits 
of the place, or even very diligently attend classical lectures, being, 
from the preposterous privilege of his college, entitled to a degree with- 
out examination : but while mostof his Etonian friends sank intoindolence, 
he not only diligently read the best Greek and Latin authors in his own 
way, but he began that course of juridical and constitutional study 
which afterwards made his name so illustrious, It is said that while he 
was an under-graduate several controversies arose in the college respect- 
ing the election of officers, and the enjoyment of exclusive privileges, and 
that he always took the popular side, opposing himself to the encroach- 
ments of the master with as much warmth and perseverance as he afier- 
wards displayed on a wider arena.t ~ 

In 1735, he proceeded B. A. as a matter of course, and having 
finished his academical curriculum, took chambers, and began to keep 
his terms in the Inner Temple. I have not been able to learn anything 
of his habits during this period of his life, but from what followed it is 
quite clear that he had been much more solicitous to qualify himself for 
business, than to form any connexions for obtaining it; and I suspect 
that, contented with hard reading and a diligent attendance to take notes 
in Westminster Hall, he did not even condescend to become a pupil: in 
an attorney’s office, which had become a common practice since ** moots” 
and “ readings” had fallen into disuse, and ‘‘ speczal pleaders” had not yet 
come up. He was called to the bar in Trinity Term, 1788. 

But very differently did young Pratt fare from the man whose rapid 
career had recently been crowned by his elevation to the woolsack. 
Yorke, the son of an attorney, himself an attorney’s clerk, and intimate 
with many attorneys and attorneys’ clerks, overflowed with briefs from 
the day he put on his robe, was in full business his first circuit, and 
was made Solicitor-General when he had been only four years at 
the bar. Pratt, the son of the Lord Chief Justice of England, bred at 
Eton and Cambridge, the associate of scholars and gentlemen, though 
equally well qualified for his profession, was for many years without a 
client. He attended daily in the Court of King’s Bench, but it was only 
to make a silent bow when called upon “ to move ;”—he sat patiently 
in chambers, but no knock came to the door, except that of a dun, 
or of a companion as briefless and more volatile. He chose the Wes- 
tern Circuit, which his father used to ‘ vide,” and where it might have 
been-expected that his name might have been an introduction to him,— 
but spring and summer, year after year, did he journey from Hampshire 
to Cornwall, without receiving fees to pay the tolls demanded of hiin at 
the turnpike gates, which were then beginning to be erected. During 
the summer circuit, in the year 1741, his nag died, and from bad luck, 


* His admission is dated 5th June, 1728. He is designated “Carolus Pratt, 
generosus, filius quintus honorabilissimi Joannis Pratt, Eq.,” &c. 

+ This reminds me of a story I have heard of a very distinguished contemporary, 
who is said, when he was entitled to fags at Eton, to have summoned them before 
him and formally to have emancipated them. 


196 LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN. 


or from the state of his finances, he was only able to replace him by a 
very sorry jade. With difficulty did he get back to London—whence 
he thus wrote to a friend :—** Alas! my horse is lamer than ever,—no 
sooner cured of one shoulder than the other began to halt. My losses 
in horseflesh ruin me, and keep me so poor that I have scarce money 
enough to bear me in a summer’s ramble ; yet ramble I must if I starve 
to pay for it.” 

To cheer him up, his school and college friend, Sneyd Davies, 
addressed to him a poetical epistle, in which the poet dwells upon the 
facp. 1745 worthlessness of the objects of human ambition, and 

bas J points out to him the course of the bright luminaries 
then irradiating Westminster Hall : 


“Who knows how far a rattle may outweigh 
The mace or sceptre? But as boys resign 
The plaything, bauble of their infancy, 
So fares it with maturer years: they sage, 
Imagination’s airy regions quit, 
And under Reason’s banner take the field, 
With resolution face the cloud or storm, 
While all their former rainbows die away. 
Some to the palace, with regardful step 
And conrtly blandishment, resort, and there 
Advance obsequious ;—in the senate some 
Harangue the full-bench’d auditory, and wield 
Their list’ning passion (such the power, the sway 
Of Reason’s eloquence !)—or at the bar, 
Where Cowper, Talbot, Somers, Yorke before 
Pleaded their way to glory’s chair supreme, 
And worthy fill’d it. Let not these great names 
Damp, but incite; nor Murray’s praise obscure 
Thy younger merit. Know, these lights, ere yet 
To noonday lustre kindled, had their dawn. 
Proceed familiar to the gate of Fame, 
Nor think the task severe, the prize too high 
Of toil and honour, for thy father’s son.”* 


He persevered for eight or nine years ; but, not inviting attorneys to 
dine with him, and never dancing with their daughters, his practice did 
not improve, and his “ zmpecunzosity” was aggravated. At last he 
was so much dispirited that he resolved to quit the bar,—to return to 
the seclusion of his college,—to qualify himself for orders,—and to live 
upon: his fellowship as he might,—till, in the course of time, he should 
be entitled to a college living,—where he might end his days in peace 
and obscurity. ‘This plan he certainly would have carried into execu- 
tion, if he had not thought that it was fit he should announce it to the 
leader of his circuit, who had always been kind to him. This was 
Henley, afterwards Lord Northington, who, first in his usual jesting 
manner, and afterwards with seriousness and feeling, tried to drive 
away the despair which had overwhelmed his friend, and prevailed so 
far as to obtain a promise that Pratt would try one circuit more.* 


* Dodsley’s Collection, vol. vi. 
+I find in the European Magazine for July, 1794, a supposed account of the 


LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN, 197 


At the first assize town on the next circuit, it so happened that Pratt 
was Henley’s junior (by contrivance it was suspected) in a very impor- 
tant cause, and that just as it was about to be called on, the leader was 
suddenly seized with an attack of gout, which (as he said) rendered it 
necessary for him to leave the Court and retire to his lodgings. The 
lead was thus suddenly cast upon Pratt, who opened the plaintiff’s case 
with great clearness and precision, made a most animated and eloquent 
reply, obtained the verdict, was complimented by the Judge, was applaud- 
ed by the audience, and received several retainers before he left the 
hall. His fame travelled before him to the next assize town, where he 
had several briefs,—and from that time he became a favourite all round 
the Circuit.* Although Henley continued senior of the ‘“ Western” 
for several years longer, till he was made Attorney-General, Pratt’s 
success was facilitated by an opening from the removal of two inferior 
men, who had long engrossed a great share of the business. Employ- 
ment in Westminster Hall soon followed ; for in new trials and other 
business connected with the Cirduit, he displayed such great ability 
and such a thorough knowledge of his profession, that in cases of weight 
he was soon eagerly sought after to hold ‘second briefs,” although he 
never seems to have hada great share of routine business,—which, with 
less eclat, is attended with more profit.t 

The first case in which he attracted the general notice of the public, 
was in the memorable prosecution of a printer by Sir 
Dudley Ryder as torpaquGlenctal under the orders fae Mea 
of the House of Commons, in consequence of some remarks on their 
commitment of the Honourable Alexander Murray, for refusing to kneel 
at their bar. Lord Chief Justice Lee, the presiding Judge, intimated 
his opinion that the jury were only to consider whether the defendant 
published the alleged libel (which was clearly proved to have been sold 
by him in his shop at the Homer’s Head in Fleet Street), and whether 
‘“* the S—r” meant * the Right Honourable Arthur Onslow, the Speaker 
of the House of Commons,” and ‘ the H—h B—ff” meant “ Peter 
Leigh, gentleman, then High Bailiff of the city of Westminster ?” 
Pratt was junior counsel for the defendant, and following Ford, a dis- 


dialogue between them, which I consider entirely fictitious. Here is a specimen of 
it. ‘ Henley heard him throughout with a seeming and anxious composure, when, 
bursting out into a horse-laugh, he exclaimed, in his strong manner, ‘What! turn 
parson at last! No, by G , Charles, you shan’t be a P—— neither! You shall 
do better for yourself, and that quickly too. Let me hear no more of this canting 
business of turning parson: you have abilities that run before us all, but you must 
endeavour to scour off a little of that d d modesty and diffidence you have about 
you, to give them fair play.’”” The writer knew so little of Pratt’s real history as to 
represent that he was aflerwards introduced for the first time by Henley to Pitt. 

* My friend Mr, Dampier, Judge of the Stannary Court, writes to me—*Sir 
James Mansfield, who was of K.C, and abt 19 years jun’ to L4 C., used to tell me 
that he remembered L4 C, on the West. Circuit, and that his rise was very sudden 
and rapid, after a long time of no practice; but once having led a cause in the west, 

he became known, and was immediately in full business, on the Circuit.” 

+ His name does not occur in the Reports nearly so frequently as those of some 
others who are long since forgotten. 








198 REIGN OF GEORGE II. 


tinguished lawyer in his day, whom he greatly eclipsed, he showed that 
ex animo he entertained the opinion respecting the rights of juries which 
he subsequently so strongly maintained against Lord Mansfield, and for 
which, after a lapse of forty years, he triumphantly struggled against 
Lord Thurlow in the last speech he ever delivered in Parliament. He 
told the jury that they were bound to look to the nature and tendency 
of the supposed libel, and to acquit the defendant, unless they believed 
that he intended by it to sow sedition, and to subvert the constitution in 
the manner charged by the prosecutors. ‘* Are you impannelled,” 
said he, ‘‘ merely to determine whether the defendant had sold a piece 
of paper value two-pence? If there be an indictment preferred against 
a man for an assault with an intent to ravish, the intent must be proved; 
so if there be an indictment for an assault with intent to murder, the 
jury must consider whether the assault was in self-defence, or on sud- 
den provocation, or of malice aforethought? The secret intention may 
be inferred from the tendency ; but the tendency of the alleged libel is 
only to be got at by considering its contents and its character; and, be- 
cause ‘ S—r’ means ‘ Speaker,’ and ‘ h—h-b—ff’ means ‘ high-badliff,’ 
are you to find the defendant guilty, if you believe in your consciences 
that what he has published vindicates the law, and conduces to the 
preservation of order?” He then ably commented upon the absurdity 
of this prosecution by the House of Commons, who arbitrarily and 
oppressively abusing the absolute power which they claimed, would 
not even tolerate a groan from their victims. Said he, ‘‘ There is a 
common proverb,—and a very wise Chancellor affirmed that proverbs 
are the wisdom of a people,—LOsERS MUST HAVE LEAVE TO SPEAK, In 
the Scripture, Job is allowed to complain even of the dispensations of 
Providence, the causes and consequences of which he could not compre- 
hend. As complaints are natural to sufferers, they may merit some 
excuse where the infliction is by the-act of man, and to common under- 
standings seems wanton and tyrannical. A gentleman of high birth 
and unblemished honour is committed to a felon’s cell in Newgate, 
because, being convicted of no offence, he refuses to throw himself 
before those, for whom he did not feel the profoundest respect, into that 
attitude of humility which he reserved for the occasion of acknowledging 
his sins, and praying for pardon before the throne of the Supreme 
Ruler of the Universe. Must all be sent to partake his dungeon who 
pity his fate? The Attorney-General tells a free people that, happen 
what will, they shall never complain. But, gentlemen, you will not 
surrender your rights, and abandon your duty. The fatal blow to 
English liberty will not be inflicted by an English Jury.” 

The Attorney-General having replied, and Lord Chief Justice Lee 
having reiterated his doctrine, by which everything was to be reserved 
to the Court, except publication and innuendoes, the jury retired, and 
being out two hours, returned a general verdict of Nor euirty. When 
the Attorney-General could be heard, after the shout of exultation which 
arose, he prevailed upon the Chief Justice to call back the jury, who 
were dispersing, and to put this question to them :—* Gentlemen of the 


LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN. 199 


jury, do you think the evidence laid before you of the defendant’s pub- 
lishing the book by selling it, is not sufficient to convince you that the 
said defendant did sell this book ?” The foreman was at first ‘* a good 
deal flustered ;” but the question being repeated to him, he said, in a 
firm voice all his brethren nodding assent, “* Not guilty, my Lord ; not 
guilty! That is our verdict, my Lord, and we abide by it!” Upon 
which there was a shout much louder than before; and the Court broke 
up.* The controversy respecting the rights of juries was not settled 
till the passing of Mr, Fox’s libel bill in 1792; but after this expression 
of public feeling, the practice of requiring persons summoned to the 
bar for breach of privilege to fall down on their knees was discontinued 
by both Houses of Parliament. 

For several years Pratt went on steadily in the ordinary progress of 
a rising lawyer. Without a silk gown he was now one of the leaders 
of the Western Circuit, and being considered peculiarly well read in 
parliamentary law, he was the favourite in all cases of a political as- 
pect. He had a great share of election business before the House of 
Commons, which for the present he preferred to a seat in that assembly. 

From some cause not explained (some uncharitably said from the ap- 
prehension that he might rival the Honourable C. Yorke, now making a 
distinguished figure at the bar) he was not a favourite with the Chan- 
cellor, but he was at last made a King’s counsel, upon a report which 
he never authorized, that he intended permanently to practise in the 
Court of King’s Bench. When with his silk gown he went over to the 
Court of Chancery, as eminent counsel then sometimes did, and he was 
actually beginning to interfere with Charles Yorke, herp >. 1755 
was treated with great civility, but with marked disre- el 
gard by Lord Hardwicke, who plainly, though not tangibly, showed that 
he never listened to anything which Pratt said.t 

I do not find that he attached himself to any particular section in po- 
litics, but he was on a footing of familiar intimacy with the great Whig 
chiefs, particularly with his old school-fellow Pitt, who was in the ha- 
bit of consulting him respecting questions of a legal or constitutional 
nature which from time to time arose. 

He was likewise in the constant habit of associating with artists and 
men of letters. Although he did not yet enjoy the sweets of domestic 
life, this must have been an agreeable portion of his existence, for, free 
from the anxieties of office, he had achieved an enviable station in so- 
ciety, the pleasures of which were enhanced by recollecting the despair 
into which he had formerly been plunged; he was courted by friends 
and respected by opponents; highly satisfied with the present he had 
brilliant prospects before him. The disgrace brought upon the country 
by the imbecility of the government might disquiet him; but his soli- 


» * 18 St. Tr. 1203-1230, 

+ On the trial of a Peer for felony it is still put down in the programme,—that is, 
“to kneel when arraigned ;” but this ceremony is not insisted on in practice. 

t On the authority of Sir James Mansfield, from the relation of Lord Camden 
himself. He added that “Lord Mansfield so enlarged the practice of K. B, that 
counsel did not leave his Court.” 


200 REIGN OF GEORGE II. 


citude was mitigated by the consideration that this government was be- 
coming daily more unpopular, and that it might be replaced by one pa- 
triotic and powerful, in which he himself might be called to take a part. 

At last, Mr. Pitt was at the head of affairs with dictatorial authority. 
[Jouy, 1757.] Resolved, both on public and private grounds, that his 

; ‘4 old Etonian friend should now be provided for, he thought 
it might be too strong a measure at once to give the Great Seal to a 
man at the bar, who had never been a law-officer of the Crown, nor had 
sat in Parliament; but he declared that Pratt should be Attorney-Gene- 
ral in the place of Sir Robert Henley, who was to be made Lord 
Keeper. Against this arrangement Charles Yorke, who had been ap- 
pointed Solicitor-General the November preceding, and whose father 
was mainly instrumental in constructing the new ministry, strongly pro- 
tested, as derogatory to his rights and his dignity; but Pitt was firm, 
maintaining that, from standing at the bar and merit, Pratt ought long 
ago to have been raised to the honours of the profession. Yorke, al- 
though in a manner very ungracious, and although still retaining a 
grudge against Pratt for this supposed slight, agreed to serve under him 
as Solicitor,—Mr, Attorney received the honour of knighthood. 

In those days the law-officers of the Crown had no anxiety about a 
seat in Parliament; they were not driven to canvass popular constitu- 
encies, with the danger of being thrown out, and the certainty of a large 
hole being made in their official earnings. Sir Charles Pratt was put 
in for the close borough of Downton, which he continued to represent 
without trouble or expense till he was made Chief Justice of the Court 
of Common Pleas. 

He now flourished in the Court of Chancery, and he was an over- 
match for the heavy Equity pleaders who for twenty years had been 
sleeping over ‘¢ Exceptions” and “ Bills of Revival.’* 

To share his prosperity and to solace his private hours, now that he 
was too much occupied to go into general society, he, though, ‘‘ on the 
shady side of forty,” resolved to take a wife. The courtships of some 
of my Chancellors have been amusing ; but, having to re/aie, not to 
invent, | can only say of this union (which I believe to have been highly 
prudent and respectable, but quite unromantic), that the lady of his 
choice was Elizabeth, daughter and coheir of Nicholas Jefferys, Esq., 
of Brecknock Priory, who brought considerable wealth into the family, 
and in compliment to whom one of its titles was afterwards selected. 
They are said to have lived together in great harmony and _ happiness ; 
but throughout the whole of Lord Camden’s career we have to regret 
that very few personal or private anecdotes of him have been handed 
down to us. We must be contented with viewing him on the stage of 
public life, 

It is a curious fact, that although he was afterwards such a distin- 
guished orator in the House of Lords,—during the whole time that he 


* During the four years that he afterwards practised in this Court, there is hardly 
a reported case in which his name is not mentioned as counsel.—See Eden's Rep. 
temp. Northington. 


LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN. 201 


sat in the House of Commons his name is not once mentioned in the 
printed parliamentary debates. ‘This arises partly from the very imper- 
fect record we have of the proceedings of the Legislature during this 
period of our history, there being only one octavo volume for the twelve 
years from 1753 to 1765,—partly from the cessation of factious strife 
during Mr, Pitt’s brilliant administration, and partly from Pratt’s style 
of speaking being rather too calm and ratiocinative for the taste of the 
Lower House,—so that while he remained there he was merely consi- 
dered “‘ par negotiis, neque supra,”—equal to carrying through the 
law business of the government, and fit for nothing more,—no one 
dreaming that hereafter he was to rival Chatham, and that Mansfield 
was to quail under him. 

The only occasien when he seems to have attracted much notice as 
a representative of the people was in bringing forward the excellent bill 
which unfortunately proved abortive—for amending the “ Habeas Cor- 
pus Act,” in consequence of a decision that it did not apply, unless 
where there was a charge of crime—so that in many instances persons 
illegally deprived of their liberty by an agent of the Crown could not 
have the benefit of it. Horace Walpole tell us, that “the Attorney- 
General declared himself for the utmost latitude of the habeas corpus,” 
and adds, that ** it reflected no small honour on him, that the first advocate 
of the Crown should appear as the first champion against prerogative.” 
The bill having easily passed the Commons, where it was warmly sup- 
ported by Pitt, was (as I have had occasion to mention elsewhere),* re- 
jected by the Lords, in deference to the opinion of the “* Law Lords,” 
who then opposed all improvement, and likewise to gratify the strong 
prejudices of the King, who had openly declared against it, and who, 
throughout the whole course of his reign, most conscientiously and 
zealously opposed every measure, domestic or colonial, that had in it 
the slightest tincture of liberality.T 

Pratt, while Attorney-General, conducted two government prosecu- 
tions,—still professing and acting upon the great principles of justice 


* Ante, p. 136. ; 

+ It is a curious fact, that, with regard to law reform, the two Houses have 
recently changed characters. I will not presume to praise the assembly to which I 
have now the honour to belong, as far as polities may be concerned, but in jurispru- 
dential legislation, I say boldly, they are greatly in advance of the other house— 
which has become the great obstacle to improvement. I will give a few instances. 
The late Libel Bill, (generally called in Westminster Hall “* Lord Campbell’s Libel 
Bill,”) which originated in the House of Lords, was deprived in the House of Com- 
mons of its most important clauses for the protection of private character and the 
liberty of the press. In the Session of 1845 the House of Commons threw out bills, 
which, being approved of by the Lord Chancellor and all the law Lords, had passcd 
the House of Lords unanimously—l1, To abolish “* Deodands,” that disgraceful rem- 
nant of superstition and barbarism; 2. To allow a compensation to be obtained by 
action where a pecuniary loss is sustained from death caused by the negligence of 
another, so that a railway company might be compelled to make some provision for 
orphans whose father has been killed by their default; and, 3. To permit actions to 
be commenced against persons who, having contracted debts in England or Ireland, 
have gone abroad to defraud their creditors, and there spend the funds remitted to 
them from home,—which at present the law cannot touch, 


202 REIGN OF GEORGE TI. 


for which he had so boldly struggled when defending those who had 
been prosecuted by his predecessors. The first was against Dr. Hensey 
for high treason in corresponding with the king’s enemies, and inviting 
them to invade the kingdom. The trial took place at the bar of the 
Court of King’s Bench, before Lord Mansfield and the other Judges of 
that Court. Mr. Attorney, in opening the case to the Jury, having read 
several letters which had been written by the prisoner to the French 
government during the war, and which he contended were treasonable, 
said, ‘‘ These letters, and translations of them being laid before you, 
you, gentlemen, will be proper judges of their destructive tendency ; in- 
deed (under the sufferance of the Court) you are the only judges of this 
fact. Proof being given that they are in the handwriting of the pri- 
soner, and were sent off by him,—if you are of opinion, from a fair 
construction of their contents, that his object was to solicit, and to en- 
courage the landing of a French army on our shore, then he is guilty 
of the crime laid to his charge by this indictment ;—but otherwise it 
will be your duty to acquit him, whatever opinion you may form of his 
character, and whatever suspicions you may entertain of his conduct.” 
The Jury having found a verdict of ‘ guzlty,” the Attorney-General 
consented that the day for the execution should be appointed at the dis- 
tance of one month. ‘The prisoner, after being several times respited, 
was finally pardoned—a striking instance of the clemency of the go- 
vernment, and a strong contrast with the execution of Byng under the 
late administration.* 
The only ex officio information which he filed was against Dr. Shib- 
beare for a most seditious and dangerous publication, 
Ua canine sel entitled, ‘‘ A Letter to the People of England,” con- 
taining direct incentives to insurrection. Horne Tooke, no enemy to 
the liberty of the press, approves of the prosecution, saying, that ‘if 
ever there was an infamous libel against the government, surely it was 
that.”’+ The trial came on in Westminster Hall before Lord Mansfield. 
In opening the case to the Jury, the Attorney, although using rather 
quieter language, adhered to the doctrine for which he had struggled 
with such brilliant success in his first great speech in the Aing v. Owen, 
and expressly told the Jury that he desired them, besides the evidence 
of publication, and the 22mwendoes, to consider the language of the libel, 
and not to find a verdict for the Crown, unless they were convinced that 
it had a direct tendency to a subversion of the public tranquillity—from 
which they might fairly infer that the defendant published it ‘ mali- 
ciously and seditiously,” as charged in the information; but he added, 
that “he did not wish for a conviction if any man in the world could 
entertain a doubt of the defendant’s guilt.” At the distance of many 
years, he stated with pride in his speech in the House of Lords on 
Fox’s libel bill, the marked manner in which he had intimated his opi- 
nion to all the world, “that the criminality of the alleged libel was a 
question of fact with which the Court had no concern.” 


* 19 St. Tr, 1342-1382. + 20 St. Tr. 708. t Annual Register, 1758, 


LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN. 203 


Pratt conducted with the same propriety the prosecution of Lord Fer- 

rers for murder before the House of Lords. Thus he 

| he ag eee aD, PTO 
opened, with touching simplicity and candour :—* My 
Lords, as I never thought it my duty in any case to attempt at elo- 
quence where a prisoner stood upon trial for his life, much less shall I 
think of doing it before your Lordships; give me leave, therefore, to 
proceed to a narrative of the facts.” These he proceeds to state with 
great perspicuity and moderation, as they were afterwards fully proved 
by the witnesses. The labouring oar on this occasion, however, fell to 
the Solicitor-General Yorke, who so ably repelled the defence of in- 
sanity.* 

The labours of the law officers of the Crown were very light at the 
close of the reign of George II., for all opposition in Parliament was 
annihilated ;—from the universal popularity of a triumphant govern- 
ment, seditious libels were unknown,—and there were no government 
prosecutions, except in the Court of Exchequer against unlucky smug- 
glers, ‘ 


CHAPTER CXLIII. 


CONTINUATION OF THE LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN TILL HE RECEIVED THE 
GREAT SEAL, 


On the demise of the Crown all things for some time went on very 
smoothly. Pratt prepared the proclamation of George II]. His patent 
as Attorney-General was renewed by the young Sovereign, and no 
great alarm was excited by the circumstance of Lord Bute, who had 
been groom of the stole to the Prince, being sworn a Privy Councillor. 
But when this nobleman was made Secretary of State, and began with 
the air of a royal favourite to interfere actively with the patronage and 
with the measures of the Government, it was discovered that Whig rule 
was coming to anend. ‘The Stuarts having fallen into utter contempt, 
so that the return of their persons was no longer to be dreaded,—there 
was to be a restoration of their maxims of government. Being of ‘* good 
Revolution principles,” which had been openly stated as a recommen- 
dation to office during the two last reigns, now made a man be looked 
upon at Court very coldly, and ‘the divine indefeasable right of kings” 
became the favourite theme,—in total forgetfulness of its incompatibility 
with the Parliamentary title of the reigning monarch, <A breaking up 
of the combination of the few great families, who called themselves “ the 
Whig party,’—who had for many years monopolised the patronage 
of the Crown,—and who had on various occasions exhibited the vices 
with which they had formerly been in the habit of reproaching the 


* 19 St. Tr. 885. 


204 REIGN OF GEORGE IIL. 


- Tories,—would have been a most laudable exploit ;—but unfortunately 
the Sovereign was determined to transfer power from one faction kept 
in check by professing liberal principles, to another imbued with a love 
of absolutism,—although the leaders of it while in opposition had occa- 
sionally spoken the language of freedom—which they were now eager 
to disclaim. 

Pratt being resolved to maintain his own principles, happen what 
would,—as the proposal to make the Judges irremovable at the com- 
mencement of a new reign, was laudable by carrying into effect the 
intention of the Act of Settkement,—and as he was not called upon to 
do anything in Parliament or in Westminster Hall inconsistent with his 
notions of duty,—he continued in his office of Attorney-General even 
when his chief—strongly condemning the foreign policy now adopted, 
—had resigned. If he had continued Attorney-General till No. XLY. 
of “ The North Briton” was published, he must then have thrown up 
his office, for he would sooner have thrust his hand into the fire than 
advised or defended general warrants to seize the printer and publisher, 
or any of the violent proceedings against Wilkes, which shortly ren- 
dered the Government so odious and contemptible, and introduced fac- 
tious struggles almost unparalleled in our annals. 

But in the lull before the storm died Lord Chief Justice Willes, and 
the Attorney-General laid his head upon “ the cushion of the Common 
Pleas.” It was rather agreeable to the Sovereign and the ministers 
that he should be placed in a Court in which it was thought that no 
political cases could come, and he could do no mischief with his ** wild 
notions of liberty.” Accordingly, his patent as Chief Justice was 
immediately made out ; and having qualified himself by submitting to 
the degree of the coif,* on the 23d of January, the first day of Hilary 
Term, 1762, he took his seat in the Court of Common Pleas. Here, it 
so turned out, there were soon more political cases than during many 
years afler came before the Court of King’s Bench,—where he would 
by no means have been trusted. He. himself anticipated nothing but 
repose in his new office; and he really thought that his political life 
was at anend. Thus he writes to his old friend Davies: * | remember 
you prophesied formerly that I should be a Chief Justice, or perhaps 
something higher. Half is come to pass: I am Thane of Cawdor, but 
the greater is behind ; and if that fails me, you are still a false prophet. 
Joking aside ; I am retired out of this bustling world to a place of sufli- 
cient profit, ease, and dignity ; and I believe that Iam a much happier 
man than the highest post in the law could have made me.” He then 
little expected that before long the prophet might have exclaimed to 
him, “ Thou hast it now, King, Cawdor, Glamis—all !” 

Lest he should never have a better opportunity, in the Court of Com- 
mon Pleas, of proclaiming his adherence to constitutional principles, a 
question of practice arising during his first term, viz., ‘¢ whether the 
Judges could refuse a plea puts darrein continuance,” the Chief Justice 


* He was called along with Serjeant Burland. Emblema annuli—Tu satis bobus. 
—2 Wilson, 136, 


LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN. 205 


said, ‘* Such discretion is contrary to the genius of the common law of 
England, and would be more fit for an Eastern monarchy than for this 
land of liberty. Nudli negabimus justitiam,”* 

But, ere long, he had to adjudicate upon a case that excited more in- 
terest in the public mind than any that had occurred in a court of law 
since the trial of the Seven Bishops. 

In the morning of Saturday, 30th of April, 17638, John Wilkes, then 
member for the borough of Buckingham, was arrested, under Lord 
Halifax’s general warrant to ‘‘ seize the authors, printers, and publish- 
ers of the North Briton, No. XLYV., together with their papers.” As 
soon as a copy of the warrant could be obtained, while he was still in 
his house in Great George Street, in custody of the messengers, Ser- 
jeant Glyn, in the Court of Common Pleas, moved for, and obtained for 
him, a writ of Habeas Corpus, returnable immediately,—the Chief Jus- 
tice observing, ‘that this was a most extraordinary warrant.” The 
Solicitor to the Treasury, who was present, having reported what had 
passed to the Secretary of State, Mr. Wilkes, before the writ could be 
served on the messengers, was committed a close prisoner to the 
Tower, and the officers of the Secretary of State returned, that ‘ he 
was not in their custody.” On the Monday a Habeas Corpus was 
obtained, directed to the Lieutenant of the Tower. 

The metropolis was now in a state of almost unparalleled excite- 
ment. At the sitting of the Court, on the Tuesday morning, Mr. 
Wilkes was brought into Court by the Lieutenant of the Tower, who, 
without noticing in his Return the ‘* general warrant” under which the 
arrest took place, merely set out the commitment to the Tower of 
Mr. Wilkes, as “‘ the author and publisher of a most infamous and 
seditious libel, entitled the North Briton, No. XLV., tending to inflame 
the minds, and to alienate the affections of the people from his Majesty, 
and to excite them to traitorous insurrections against the government.” 
Thus the question of the legality of general warrants was for the pre- 
sent evaded: but Serjeant Glyn moved, that Mr. Wilkes should be set 
at liberty, ‘* first, on the ground that it did not appear that there had 
been any information on oath against him before his commitment ; 
secondly, that no part of the libel was set forth to enable the Court to 
see whether any offence had been committed ; and, ¢hzrdly, that he was 
privileged from arrest as a member of Parliament.” After a learned 
argument by counsel, and a vapouring speech from Mr, Wilkes him- 
self, the Court took time to consider ; and, on the Friday following, the 
Lord Chief Justice Pratt delivered their unanimous opinion, overruling 
the first two objections, and thus dealing with the last: ‘ The third 
matter insisted upon for Mr. Wilkes is, that he is a member of Parlia- 
ment, (which is admitted by the King’s Serjeants,) and so entitled to 
privilege to be free from arrests in all cases, except treason, felony, 
and actual breach of the peace ; and we are all of the opinion that 
he is entitled to that privilege, and that he must be set at liberty. The 


* 2 Wilson, 137, Paris v. Salkeld. 


206 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


Seven Bishops were most unjustly ousted of their privilege, three of the 
Judges deciding that a seditious libel was an actual breach of the peace. 
4 Inst, 25 says, ‘ the privilege of Parliament holds, unless it be in three 
cases, viz., treason, felony, and the peace. Privilege of Parliament 
holds in informations for the King, unless in the cases before excepted.’ 
The case of an information against Lord Tankerville for bribery (4 
Anne) was within the privilege of Parliament. We are all of opinion, 
that a libel is not a breach of the peace: it tends toa breach of the 
peace, and that is the utmost. But that which only tends to a breach 
of the peace cannot be an actual breach of it. In the case of the Seven 
Bishops, Judge Powell, the only honest man of the four Judges, dis- 
sented, and | am bound to be of his opinion, and to say that case is 
not law—but it shows the miserable condition to which the state was 
then reduced. Let Mr. Wilkes be discharged from his imprisonment.” 
A great part of the population of London being in Westminster Hall, 
Palace Yard, and the adjoining streets, a shout arose which was heard 
with dismay at St. James’s,.* 

As the authorities then stood, I think a court of law was bound to. 

[Nov ae in favour of privilege in such a case; but al- 

° ‘4 though I must condemn the servile desire to please the 
King and his ministers, by which both Houses were actuated on the 
re-assembling of Parliament, I cannot but approve the resolution to 
which they jointly came, and which, I presume, would now be con- 
sidered conclusive evidence of the law, “ that privilege of Parliament 
does not extend to the case of writing or publishing seditious libels.”+ I 
do not think that privilege of Parliament should, in any respect, inter- 
fere with the execution of the criminal law of the country. Little in- 
convenience arises from the immunity of members of Parliament from 
arrest for debt, and this is necessary to protect them in the discharge 
of their public functions, 

The immense popularity which Lord Chief Justice Pratt now ac- 
quired, I am afraid, led him into some intemperance of language, 
although his decisions might be sound. Many actions were brought in 
his Court, and tried before him, for arrests under general warrants, and 
the juries giving enormous damages, applications were made to set 
aside the verdicts, and to grant new trials. It might be right to refuse 
to interfere, but not in terms such as these :—‘‘ The personal injury 
done to the plaintiff was very small, so that if the jury had been con- 
fined by their oath to consider the mere personal injury only, perhaps 
twenty pounds would have been thought damages sufficient ; but the 
jury saw before them a magistrate exercising arbitrary power over all 
the King’s subjects—violating Magna Charta, and attempting to destroy 
the liberty of the kingdom by insisting on the legality of this general 


* 2 Wilson, 151-160; 19 St. Tr. 982-1002. 

+ 15 Parl. Hist. 1365. ~T am not aware whether the privilege was claimed in 
cases of libel after conviction, so as to prevent sentence of imprisonment. The Earl 
of Abingdon, and other members of Parliament, have since been sentenced to im- 
prisonment for libel without question. 


LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN. 207 


warrant ; they heard the King’s counsel, and saw the Solicitor to the 
Treasury endeavouring to support and maintain the legality of the 
warrant in a tyrannical and severe manner. These are the ideas 
which struck the jury on the trial, and I think they have done right in 
giving exemplary damages. ‘To enter a man’s house under colour of 
a nameless warrant in order to procure evidence, is worse than the 
Spanish Inquisition—a law under which no Englishman would wish to 
live an hour ;—it was a most daring attack on the liberty of the sub- 
ject. ‘Nullus liber homo capiatur vel imprisonetur, nec super eum 
ibimus—nisi per legale judicium parium suorum vel per legem terre.’ 
An attempt has been made to destroy this protection against arbitrary 
power. I cannot say what damages I should have given if I had been 
upon the jury.’”’* 

Mr, Wilkes’s own action being afterwards tried before Lord Chief 
Justice Pratt, he said, ‘‘ The defendants claim a right, [Dec. 6. 1763.] 
under a general warrant and bad precedents, to force 
persons’ houses, break open escritoires, seize papers where no inventory 
is made of the things taken, and no persons’ names specified in the 
warrant, so that messengers are to be vested with a discretionary 
power to search wherever their suspicions or their malice may lead 
them, As to the damages, I continue of opinion that the jury are not 
limited by the injury received. Damages are designed not only as a 
satisfaction to the injured person, but likewise as a@ punishment to the 
guilty, and as proof of the detestation in which the wrongful act is held 
by the gury.”t+ The jury having given 1000/.,a bill of exceptions was 
tendered to the direction—but the Chief Justice refused to receive it, as 
it came too late after verdict. 

In Leach v. Money,t however, the question as to the legality of 
general warrants, was regularly raised. There Lord Chief Justice Pratt, 
having given a similar direction, a bill of exceptions was duly tendered 
and carried by writ of error into the King’s Bench. It was in arguing 
this case that Dunning laid the foundation of his splendid fame. Lord 
Mansfield having, in the course of the argument, thrown out an opinion 
against the legality of the warrant, the Attorney-General Yorke con- 
trived to be beaten on a by-point; but, without a formal judgment, 
general warrants have ever since been considered illegal, although they 
were sanctioned by a uniform usage of ancient standing in the office of 
the Secretary of State.§ 

Another very important case was brought before the Court of Com- 
mon Pleas while Pratt presided there, in which the question was dis- 
tinctly raised, whether, ‘on a charge of libel, the Secretary of State 
may grant a warrant to search for, seize, and carry away papers ;” 
and in support of this practice too a long course of precedents was 
proved. But after protracted arguments the Chief Justice said,— The 
warrant was an execution in the first instance without any previous 


* 2 Wils. 206, 207, Huckle v. Money. ¢ 3 Burr. 1692. 
t Ib, 244, Beardmore v. Carrington. § 19 St. Tr. 982-1002. 


208 REIGN OF GEORGE IIL. 


summons, examination, hearing the plaintiff, or proof that he was the 
author of the supposed libels,—a power claimed by no other magistrate 
whatever (Scroggs, C. J., always excepted); it was left to the discre- 
tion of the defendants to execute the warrant in the absence or presence 
of the plaintiff when he might have no witness present to see what they 
did, for they were to seize all papers, bank bills, or any other valuable 
papers they might take away if they were so disposed. If this be 
lawful, both Houses of Parliament are involved in it; for they have 
both ruled that, in such matters, they are on a footing with all the rest 
of the King’s subjects. » In the case of Wilkes, a member of the House 
of Commons, all his books and papers were seized and taken away : 
we were told by one of these witnesses, that ‘ he was obliged by his 
oath to sweep away all papers whatsoever.’ If this be law, it would be 
found in our books, but no such law ever existed in this country ; our law 
holds property so sacred, that no man can set his foot on his neighbour’s 
close without his leave. ‘The defendants have no right to avail themselves 
of the usage of these warrants since the Revolution,—that usage being 
contrary to law. The Secretary of State cannot make that law which 
is not to be found in our books. It must have been the guilt or poverty 
of those on whom such warrants have been executed that deterred or 
hindered them from contending against the power of a Secretary of 
State and the Solicitor to the Treasury, as such warrants could never 
have passed for lawful. It is said to be better for the Government and 
the public to.seize the libel before it is published ; if the legislature be 
of that opinion, they will make it lawful. As yet our law is wise and 
merciful, and supposes every man accused to be innocent till he is tried 
by his peers and found guilty. Upon the whole, we are of opinion that 
this warrant is wholly illegal and void.’’* 

Pratt, while a common law Judge, certainly was of signal service to 
his country. He not only arrested some flagrant abuses in his own 
time, but he laid down principles upon which other flagrant abuses still 
continuing, such as the opening of private letters at the post-office by 
order of the Secretary of State, may still be reached and remedied. 

It would appear from the Reports, that there were few cases of im- 
portance, not of a political nature, debated in the Common Pleas while 
Pratt was Chief Justice. The most important, perbaps, was Doe vy, 
Kersey,t in which he maintained, in opposition to the other Judges of 
his own Court, and also to a unanimous decision of the King’s Bench, 
that witnesses to a will must be disinterested when they attest it, and 
that it is not enough that their interest is removed before they come to 
prove it; but though he was overruled, the legislature adopted his 
opinion, by enacting that the moment of attestation is the period to re- 
gard in considering their credibility. [In no other case was there a final 
difference between him and his brethren on the bench, and all his con- 


* Entick v. Carrington, 19 St. Tr. 1002-1030. 
t See Doe d. Hendson y. Kersey, 4 Burn, Eccl. Law, 97; Wyndham v. Chatwynd, 
1 Burn, 414. 


LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN. 209 


temporaries unite in bearing testimony to the combination of dignity, 
impartiality, and courtesy, with which he presided over the proceedings 
of his Court.* 

After the liberation of Wilkes, and the condemnation of “ general 
warrants” and *‘search warrants for papers,” he became the idol of the 
nation, Grim representations of him laid down the law from sign- 
posts.. Many busts and prints of him were sold, not only in the streets 
of the metropolis, but in provincial towns and remote villages. A fine 
portrait of him by Sir Joshua Reynolds, with a flattering inscription, 
‘in honour of the zealous assertor of English liberty by law,” was 
placed in the Guildhall of the city of London. Addresses of thanks to 
him poured in from all quarters, and most of the great municipalities 
of the empire presented him with the freedom of their corporations. 
English journals and English travellers carried his fame over Europe, 
and one of the sights of London which foreigners went to see, was THE 
Great Lorp Cuier Jusrice Prart. 

On the formation of the Rockingham administration, although the 
leaders unfortunately consented to have Northington for j 
their Chancellor, they wished to court popularity, and Loner tone 

a LBEY: PO} Ys 

to give a pledge that they meant to follow a different course of policy 
at home and abroad from their predecessors, who prosecuted Wilkes, 
and taxed the colonies. Accordingly, their first act was to raise the 
popular Judge to the peerage, by the style of ** Baron Camden, of 
Camden Place, in the county of Kent.”+ The property from which 
he took his title had belonged to the celebrated antiquary of that name, 
and had passed, through several changes of ownership, into the pos- 
session of the Pratts. 

The new Peer took his seat in the House of Lords on the first day of 
the following session, being looked at with a jealous eye both by Lord. 
Northington, who had opposed his elevation, and by Lord Mansfield, 
who instinctively dreaded a contest for the supremacy which he had en-. 
joyed there since the death of Lord Hardwicke. 

I have already mentioned Lord Camden’s maiden effort upon the 
right to tax America, where he was so rudely assailed by the Lord 
Chancellor.t The declaratory bill being brought in, he on a subse-. 
quent day opposed it in a set speech, upon which he had taken immense 
pains,—which has been rapturously praised, and some passages of 
which are still in the mouths of schoolboys,—but which I must ac-. 
knowledge seems to me to exhibit false reasoning, and false taste. 
Having begun by alluding to the charge against him, as “‘ the broacher 
of newfangled doctrines, contrary to the laws of this kingdom, and 
subversive of the rights of Parliament,” he thus proceeded, “* My Lords, 


* 2 Wilson, 275-292, Entick v. Carrington, 19 St. Tr. 1073. 

+ The Duke of Grafton, in his “ Journal,” says, “One of the first acts of our 
administration was to obtain from his Majesty the honours of a peerage for the true 
patriot, Lord Chief Justice Pratt, which the King had the condescension to grant to 
our earnest entreaties; the news of which was reecived by the nation. with much, 
applause.”— Part II. p. 47. 

t Ante, p. 175. 

VOL. V. 14 


210 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


this is a heavy charge, but more so when made against one stationed 
as I am, in both capacities as a Peer anda Judge, the defender of the law 
and the constitution. When | spoke last, I was indeed replied to, but not 
answered. As the affair is of the utmost importance, and in its conse- 
quences may involve the fate of kingdoms, I have taken the strictest 
review of my arguments, I have re-examined all my authorities—fully 
determined if I found myself mistaken, publicly to own my mistake 
and give up my opinion; but my searches have more and more con- 
vinced me that the British Parliament has no right to tax the Ameri- 
cans. I shall not criticise the strange language in which your pro- 
posed declaration is framed ; for to what purpose, but loss of time, to 
consider the particulars of a bill, the very existence of which is illegal, 
—absolutely illegal,—contrary to the fundamental laws of nature, con- 
trary to the fundamental laws of this constitution,—a_ constitution 
grounded on the eternal and immutable laws of nature,—a constitution 
whose centre is liberty, which sends liberty to every individual who 
may happen to be within any part of its ample circumference? Nor, 
my Lords, is the doctrine new; it is as old as the constitution ; it grew 
up with it; indeed, it is its support ; taxation and representation are in- 
separably united. (rod hath joined them, no British Parliament can put 
them asunder; to endeavour to do so, is to stab our very vitals. My 
position is this—I repeat it—I will maintain it to my last hour—taxa- 
tion and representation are inseparable ; this position is founded on the 
laws of nature; it is itself a law of nature; for whatever is a man’s 
own, is absolutely his own; no man has a right to take it from him 
without his consent, either expressed by himself or representative ; who- 
soever attempts to do it attempts an injury ; whosoever does it commits 
a robbery ;* he throws down and destroys the distinction between liberty 
and slavery. ‘Taxation and representation are coeval with, and essential 
to, the constitution. I wish the maxim of Machiavel were followed— 
that of examining a constitution, at.certain periods, according to its 
first principles; this would correct abuses and supply defects. To 
endeavour to fix the era when the House of Commons began in 
this kingdom, is a most pernicious and destructive attempt; to fix 
it in Edward’s or Henry’s reign, is owing to the idle dreams of some 
whimsical ill-judging antiquarians, When did the House of Commons 
first begin? when my Lords ?—it began with the constituion.. There is 
not a blade of grass growing in the most obscure corner of this kingdom 
which is not—which was not ever—represented since the constitution 
began ; there is not a blade of grass which, when taxed, was not taxed 
by the consent of the proprieter.” He then examines, at great length, 
the arguments drawn, by analogy, from Ireland, Wales, Berwick, and 
the Counties Palatine; and, having treated with merited scorn the 


* These words offended George Grenville, the author of the Stamp Act, so much, 
that he complained of them in the House of Commons, pronouncing them, with 
great emphasis, to be “a libel upon Parliament;” and threatening to bring the 
printer of the speech to the bar for punishment. But no farther notice was taken 
of it—Almon’s Biographical Anecdotes, i. 377, 


LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN. 211 


miserable crotchet, that America was virtually represented in the House 
of Commons, he thus concluded: “The forefathers of the Americans 
did not leave their native country, and subject themselves to every 
danger and distress, to be reduced to a state of slavery : they did not 
give up their rights; they expected protection, not chains, from their 
mother country; by her they believed that they should be defended in 
the possession of their property, and not despoiled of it. But if you. 
wantonly press this declaration, although you now repeal the Stamp 
Act, you may pass it again in a month; and future taxation must be in 
view, or you would hardly assert your right to enjoy the pleasure of 
offering an insult. Thus our fellow-subjects in America will have no- 
thing which they can call their own, or, to use the words of the im- 
mortal Locke, What property have they in that which another may by 
right take, when he pleases, to himself |!””* 

Although the Stamp Act was most properly repealed, and nothing 
could exceed the folly of accompanying the repeal of it with the statuta- 
ble declaration of the abstract right to tax, I confess Ido not understand 
the reasoning by which, admitting that the British Parliament had 
supreme power to legislate for the colonies, a law passed to lay a tax 
upon them, though it may be unjust and impolitic, is a nullity. I agree 
that it may be put upon the footing of an act of attainder, without hear- 
ing the party attainted in his defence, or an act to take away a man’s 
private property, without compensation ; but could Lord Camden, sitting 
as‘a Judge, have held such acts to be nullities—hanging for murder the 
Sheriff who assisted at the execution in the one case, or in an action of 
trespass, recognising the property of the original owner, in the other ? 
Would not a statute appressively encroaching on the personal liberty of 
the colonists, or wantonly interfering with the exercise of their industry, 
be in all respects as objectionable as a statute enacting that ‘ their deeds 
and contracts shall be void, unless written upon paper or parchment 
which has paid a duty to the state?” Nor do I see how our constitu; 
tional rights would be at all endangered by acknowledging the undoubted 
fact, that representation was unknown in this country till the end of the 
reign of Henry IIL, and that the Commons did not till long after sit in 
a separate chamber as an independent branch of the legislature. 
The assertion that all property and that all classes were represented in 
England, rather favours George Hardinge’s doctrine, ‘“ that the Ameri- 
cans were actually represented by the knights of the shire for Kent, 
because the land in America was all granted by the Crown, to be held 
in socage of the manor of East Greenwich in that county.” However, 
our patriot displayed a noble enthusiasm on this occasion, and perhaps 
one ought to be ashamed of critically weighing the expressions which 


he used.T 


* 16 Parl. Hist. 177. 

t Junius, in his first letter, which appeared on the 2lst of January, 1769, six 
years before hostilities commenced, severely reflected on the speeches of Mr. Pitt 
and Lord Camden in this debate, and accused them of thereby separating the colo- 
nies from the mother country. ‘Mr. Pitt and Lord Camden were to be the patrons 
of America, because they were in opposition. Their declaration gave spirit and 


12 REIGN OF GEORGE IIL 
With the exception of opposing the declaratory Act, Lord Camden 
gave the Rockingham administration his cordial support, and he was 
free from the imputation to which Mr, Pitt was subject, of assisting the 
Court in getting rid of men who were sincerely anxious to conciliate 
America. 
When Lord Northington at last abruptly brought on a crisis, and 
Mr. Pitt was sent for to form a new administration, Lord Camden was 
[Jory, 1766 on the Midland Circuit. A communication was imme- 
; ‘] diately opened between them; and Lord Camden ex- 
pressed his willingness to co-operate in any way for the public good. 
The state of his mind, and the progress of the negotiation, will best be 
disclosed by the following letters written by him to Mr. T. Walpole, a 
common friend. 


“ July 13, 1766. Nottingham. 


«“ Dear Sir, 

“T thank you for your intelligence, which turns out to be true, as 
the same post brought me a letter from the Chancellor to the same 
effect, though more authentic and circumstantial. Mr. P. then is come. 
May it be prosperous! But I foresee many difficulties before an 
administration can be completely settled. You are near the scene of 
action, and as likely to be entrusted by the great man as anybody; or, 
if not, must of course be so conversant with those who know, as to hear 
the best intelligence. My old friend, the C* has taken so much laudable 
pains to leave his office, that he must, in my opinion, remain. The D. 
of N., and your friend, the Marquess, must give way: but I do not 
believe Mr. P. will wish to remove the rest in office, unless, perhaps, 
they, in a pique, should scorn to hold on under his appointment, which 
I do not expect. It is an untoward season of the year, everybody out 
of town—and expresses must be sent for concurrence and concert to 
poor gentlemen who are at their country-houses, without friends or 
advisers near; so they must, in some measure, follow the dictates of 
their own judgment, which may be more likely to mislead than direct. 
I am unable to conjecture ; but if Iam not much mistaken, the E. T. 
will accede. 

«[ can send you nothing in return for your intelligence, unless I 
could suppose you could be interested with stories of highwaymen and 
housebreakers. Perhaps you will not be displeased to hear that.I am 
well and in good spirits—have had much travelling and little business 
—that one-third of my circuit is over, and that I am, let matters be 
settled or unsettled, 

‘*« Most sincerely yours, 
‘* CAMDEN.” 


argument to the colonies ; and while, perhaps, they meant no more than the ruin of 
a minister, they, in effect, divided one half of the empire from the other.” I cannot 
agree with this unscrupulous writer in imputing improper motives to them; but I 
do agree with him in condemning their assertion, “that the authority of the British 
Legislature is not supreme over the colonies in the same sense in which it is supreme 
over Great Britain,’—Sce Junius’s Letter, 5th October, 1771. 


LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN. 218 


“July 19,1766. Leicester. 
“ Dear Sir, 

**[ am arrived late at this place, and find letters from you and Nut- 
hall, pressing me to leave the circuit. I am willing enough to quit this 
disagreeable employment, but I think I ought not upon a private inti- 
mation, to depart from my post. If you will by letter, or by express 
if you please, only tell me that Mr. Pitt would wish to see me, I will 
come to town at a moment’s warning. L* T. is gone. If Mr. Pitt is 
not distressed by this refusal, or if he is provoked enough not to feel his 
distress, 1 am rather pleased than mortified. Let him fling off the 
Grenvilles, and save the nation without them. 

“Yours ever, &c. 
“¢ CAMDEN,” 


“July 20,1766. Leicester. 
“ Dear Sir, 

“*] have slept since I wrote to you, and having taken the advice of 
my pillow upon the subject of my coming to town, | remain of the 
same opinion, that [ ought not at this time to quit my station, uncalled 
and uninvited. If Mr. P. really wants me, I would relieve his delicacy 
by coming at his request, conveyed to me either by you or Mr. Nut- 
hall ; but I suspect the true reason why he has not desired me to come, 
is because as things are just now, he does not think it fitting. Sure Mr. 
P. will not be discouraged a second time by Lord T.’s refusal. He 
ought not for his own sake, for it does become him now to satisfy the 
world that his greatness does not hang on so slight a twig as T, 
This nation is in a blessed condition if Mr. P. is to take his directions 
from Stowe. A few days will decide this great affair, and a few days 
will bring me back of course.. In the meantime, if my sooner return 
should be thought of any consequence, I am within the reach of an 
express. I was catched at Chatsworth by the D. of Devon and his 2 
uncles, and very civilly compelled to lye there; but not one word of 
politics, 

“Tam, &c. 
“‘ CAMDEN,” 


“ Warwick, July 24, 1766. 
‘¢ Dear Sir, 

‘‘[ am much concerned to find that Mr. Pitt’s illness hangs upon 
hirn so long, and the wishes of the public by that means disturbed. He 
must set his hand to the plough, for the nation canuot be dallied with 
any longer. L* T.’s wild conduct, though Mr. P. is grievously 
wounded by it, may, for ought I know, turn out to be a favourable 
circumstance to reconcile him more to the present ministry, and of 
which corps be must form, as he always intended, this our administra- 
tion. Indeed this inclination is one of the principal grounds of difference 
between the two brothers. L* T. having closely connected himself 
with that set of men whom he opposed so inveterately, I have heard 
very authentically from the Stowe quarter, that one of the chief points 


214 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


upon which they broke was upon the promotion of L* G., and recom- 
mended by L# 'T. to be Secretary of State, under the colour of enlarging 
the bottom, and reconciliating all parties. That since he asked nothing 
for his brother G., he had a right to insist upon this promotion, The 
other, on the contrary, puta flat negative upon all that connexion. L# 
T. was very willing to go hand in hand with Mr, P. part passu, as he 
called it, but would acknowledge no superiority or control. This was 
continually and repeatedly inculcated, not to say injudiciously, if he 
really intended to unite, because such declarations beforehand must 
create an incurable jealousy, and sow disunion in the very moment of 
reconciliation. He taxes Mr. P. with private ingratitude, and is offended 
that two or three days elapsed before he was sent for. This is public 
talk at his Lordship’s table, and therefore requires no secrecy. There 
are now, or will be in a few days at Stowe, the two Dukes of B. and 
M., with their ladies, Sir J. Amhurst and the royal guests. Therefore 
L¢ T, is declared not the head of that party, for that is an honour he 
must never expect, but a proselyte received amongst them. Let not 
Mr. P. be alarmed at this formidable gathering of great men. The 
King and the whole nation are on the other side. I hope to be in town 
next Wednesday. In the meantime, 
‘¢ Believe me, &c. 
“* CAMDEN.” 


When he arrived in town, on the conclusion of the circuit, he found 
the whimsical arrangement nearly completed,—according to which Mr. 
Pitt, becoming a peer, was to be Lord Privy Seal and Prime Minister, 
the Duke of Grafton was to be first Lord of the Treasury, Lord 
Northington was to be President of the Council, Sir Charles Saunders 
was to be first Lord of the Admiralty, and Lord Shelburne and General 
Conway were to be Secretaries of State. The Great Seal was offered 
to Lord Camden, and, without hesitation, he accepted it,—stipulating 
only (as he reasonably might), that on giving up a lucrative situation, 
which he held during good behaviour, he should have a retired allowance 
of 15002. a year, and the reversion of a tellership for his son.* Although 
there were strange and discordant elements in the new cabinet into 
which he was to enter, he reasonably supposed that he must be secure 
under the auspices of that great man, who had formed it, and who had 
himself, through life, been the devoted friend of liberty. 

Believing that the Lord Privy Seal would reduce into insignificance 
the Heads of the Treasury and of the Admiralty, and the Secretaries of 
State, he anticipated, with certainty, the speedy conciliation of America, 


* In a letter to the Duke of Grafton, dated 1st Aug. 1766, he says—“ The favours 
I am to request from your Grace’s despatch are as follows: 

“J, My patent for the salary. 

“2. Patent for 1500/. a year upon the Irish establishment, in case my office should 
determine before the tellership drops. 

“3, Patent for tellership for my son. 

“4, The equipage money : Lord Northington tells me it is 20007. This, I believe, 
is ordered by a warrant from the Treasury to the Exchequer.” 


LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN. 215 


the increased humiliation of the House of Bourbon, and the return of 
tranquillity at home, by the abandonment of the unconstitutional policy 
which had marked the measures of government since the commence- 
ment of the present reign. He thought that Pitt’s second administration 
was to be as prosperous as the first,—if, from its pacific tendency, it 
should be less brilliant. For himself, he calculated that with such a 
chief the political functions of his office would require little time, and 
cause little anxiety,—so that concurring in the measures of a powerful 
as well as liberal government, he might chiefly devote himself to the 
discharge of his judicial duties, and to the improvement of our jurispru- 
dence. 

Ata council held at St. James’s on the 30th of July, 1766, Lord 
Camden received the Great Seal from his Majesty, with the title of 
Lord Chancellor. 


CHAPTER CXLIV. 


CONTINUATION OF THE LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN TILL HE BECAME AN 
EX-CHANCELLOR, 


Lorp CampEn’s appointment to the woolsack gave almost universal 
satisfaction ;* and he had more doubts than an 
one else as to his own sufficiency. He dane ait Rha eA 
lucky that he had the long vacation to refresh his recollection of Equity, 
and to get up the cases which had recently been decided in the Court 
of Chancery, while he had been a common law Judge. 

He held sittings before Michaelmas Term in Lincoln’s Inn Hall, and 
on the 6th of November, the first day of the term, after a grand pro- 
cession from his house in Lincoln’s Inn Fields to Westminster Hall, he 
was there installed in his office with all the usual solemnities.t 


* Lord Shelburne, in a letter to Mr. Pitt, dated 10th July, 1766, says, in a “P.S. 
You must permit me to add how happy I am in the choice of a Chancellor—and 
murmurs only come from the Ultra Tories.” 

+ “30th July, 1766. Robert Earl of Northington, Lord High Chancellor of Great 
Britain, having delivered the Great Seal to the King, at his Palace of St. James’s, 
on Wednesday, the 30th day of July, 1766, his Majesty, the same day, delivered it 
to Charles Lord Camden, Chief Justice of the Common Pleas, with the title of Lord 
High Chancellor of Great Britain; who was then sworn into the said office before 
his Majesty in Council, His Lordship sat in Lincoln’s Inn Hall during the Seals 
before Michaelmas Term: and on Monday, the 6th day of November, being the first 
day of Michaelmas Term, went in state from his house in Lincoln’s Inn Fields to 
Westminster Hall, accompanied by the Earl of Northington, Lord President of the 
Council, the Duke of Grafton, First Lord of the Treasury, the Earl of Bristol, Lord 
Lieutenant of Ireland, the Earl of Shelburne, and the Right Honourable Henry 
Seymour Conway, two of his Majesty’s principal Secretaries of State, the Lord Vis- 
count Barrington, Secretary at War, Lord Edgecombe, Treasurer of the Household, 
Sir Charles Saunders, Knight of the Bath, First Lord of the Admiralty, the Maste 
of the Rolls, the Judges, King’s Serjeants, King’s Counsel, and other persons of 


216 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


- As an Equity Judge Lord Camden fully sustained the reputation he 
had acquired while presiding in the Court of Common Pleas. When 
he pronounced a decree upon the construction of a will, or the liability 
of a trustee, he was not received with shouts of applause from hundreds 
of thousands of persons assembled round the Court, as when he ordered 
the liberation of Wiikzs, or adjudged the illegality of “ general war- 
rants ;” but he now conciliated the calm respect and good opinion of all 
parties by his extensive legal information, by his quickness of percep- 
tion and soundness of understanding, by the perspicuity with which his 
opinions were propounded, by the patience and impartiality which he 
uniformly displayed, and by his dignified politeness, which appeared 
more graceful by contrast with the unrefined manners of his predeces- 
sor. Although without the qualification now considered indispensable 
and all-sufficient for the Equity bench, of having passed many years in 
the drudgery of drawing bills and answers, his mind was deeply im- 
bued with the general principles of jurisprudence: he had studied sys- 
tematically the Roman civil law,—he was acquainted with the common 
law of England in all its branches, the most familiar and the most ab- 
struse,—his time in his earlier years after entering the profession not 
having been engrossed by “' prepropera proxis,”—instead of a hurried 
attention to a great variety of points, he had acquired the. habit of deli- 
berately investigating great questions,—as a Nisi Prius leader he 
possessed the faculty of sifting evidence and dealing rapidly and skil- 
fully with facts,—he had taken infinite pains to make himself master of 
Equity doctrines and practice,—and for some years he had been first in 
business, as well as in rank, at the Chancery bar. In those days the 
notion had not sprung up that a common lawyer was unfit to be an 
Equity Judge and Lord Camden was allowed to discharge his duty 
most admirably, even by hoary fixtues of the Court, such as AMBLER, 
who had “ practised as a barrister for upwards of forty years, of which 
thirty were employed in the Court of Chancery, under five Lord Chan- 
cellors, three sets of Commissioners, and five Masters of the Rolls.”’* 
But we must appreciate his merits chiefly by the general testimonies 
in his favour from his contemporaries; for, when Chancellor he was 
most unfortunate in the want of a “ vates sacer.” Not unfrequently 
his chief reporter, after a brief statement of the arguments of the de- 
fendant’s counsel, thus deals with a judgment on which the Judge had 
bestowed great labour, and which was admired for its learning, precision, 
and lucid arrangement: ** And Lord Camden being of the same opinion 
which he delivered at large, the bill was dismissed.” But though 


quality. The Lords accompanied him to the Court of Chancery, where (before he 
entered upon business), in their presence, he took the oaths of allegiance and supre- 
macy, and the oath of Chancellor of Great Britain, the Master of the Rolls holding 
the book, and the Deputy Clerk of the Crown reading the said oaths: which, being 
done, the Attorney-General moved that it might be recorded, and it was ordered 
accordingly. ‘Then the Lords departed, leaving the Lord Chancellor in Court.”— 
Cr. Off. Min., No. 2, p. 14, 

* Preface to Ambler, vi. 

t Ambler, 660, Dickens is generally more provokingly deficient. 


LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN. 217 


these chroniclers only give us his dry conclusions of law in the fewest 
and most ordinary words, we may form a notion of his style and man- 
ner from a ‘“‘ Reminiscence” of Butter. ‘I distinctly remember,” 
says he, ‘“‘ Lord Camden’s presiding in the Court of Chancery. His 
Lordship’s judicial eloquence was of the colloquial kind—extremely 
simple,—diffuse, but not desultory. He introduced legal idioms fre- 
quently, and always with a pleasing and great effect. Sometimes, 
however, he rose to the sublime strains of eloquence: but the sublimity 
was altogether in the sentiment; the diction retained its simplicity ; this 
increased the effect.”* 

I do not think that during the time he held the Great Seal (only three 
years and a half) he added much to our Equity code. I do not find 
questions of greater importance settled by him, than. that a bequest to 
‘the most necessitous of my relations” shall go among the nezt of kin, 
according to the Statute of Distributions, without any inquiry into their 
circumstances ;f and that by a bequest “ of all the testator’s pictures,” 
(he having at the making of his will a good collection,) after-purchased 
pictures shall pass.t 

Only one of his decrees was reversed, and the general opinion has 
been, that the reversal was wrong., A testator having devised freehold 
estates to certain uses, and bequeathed a leasehold messuage to trustees 
to convey to the uses of the freehold, *‘ so that they should not separate,” 
suffered a recovery of the freehold estates, whereby, as to them, the will 
was revoked, Lord Camden held, that the bequest of the leasehold was 
revoked also.) This decree was reversed on appeal ; but Lord Eldon 
said, in Southey v. Somerville,|| that “he should be disposed to agree 
with the opinion of Lord Camden rather than the judgment of the House 
of Lords ;”’ and, on principle, I conceive it must be assumed (however 
contrary to the fact), that the testator knew and intended all the conse- 
quences of the recovery which he suffered.** 

Lord Camden’s plans for legal reform were defeated by the unhappy 
turn which politics and parties took (so contrary to his seemingly well- 
founded expectations) almost from the moment of his elevation to his 
present office. He had intended, under the auspices of Lord Chatham, 
again to have brought forward his Habeas Corpus Bill, with some other 
measures to improve the administration both of criminal and civil justice ; 
but the great luminary to whose light and influence he had trusted was 
eclipsed, and for a time seemed blotted out of the system, so that dark- 
ness was spread over the political world, and chaos seemed to have 
come again, 

Lord: Chatham had scarcely called into existence hia motley adminis- 
tration—pleasantly depicted by Burke, as ‘a cabinet so curiously inlaid | 


* Butler’s Reminiscences, 

+ Wedmore v. Woodroffe, Ambler, 636. t Ib, 640. 

§ Darley vy. Darley, Amb. 653, 

|| 13 Ves. Jun. 492. 

** 3 Br. P. C. 365; and see Carrington v. Payne, 5 Ves. Jun. 404; Lowndes v. 
Stone, ib. 649 ; Ware v. Polhill, 11 Ves. Jun. 289. 


218 REIGN OF GEORGE IIL 


—such a piece of diversified mosaic—such a tessellated pavement with- 
out cement—here a bit of black stone, and there a bit of white, which 
had a chance of coherence only from the controlling genius of its framer” 
—when by fresh and aggravated attacks of his old malady, the gout, 
he was almost disabled from attending to public business, and soon after 
on account of a nervous disorder which is supposed even to have affected 
his mind, he was long seen only by his wife and his medical attendants, 
The consequence was, that Lord Camden’s situation soon became most 
embarrassing and distressing; after a period of utter confusion, the 
members ofthe government from whom he most differed got the as- 
cendency, and from the protracted hope of the restoration of his friend, 
who nominally continued in office, he was cut off from the resource of 
resigning and going into opposition. 

The first difficulty which arose after the formation of the new go- 
vernment was from the scarcity, and apprehension of famine produced by 
the failure of the harvest. The price of provisions was rapidly advanc- 
ing and the greatest alarm prevailed in the public mind. The prime 
minister was confined to his bed at Bath. A proposal being made that 
the exportation of corn should be prevented, the Chancellor recom- 
mended that this object should be effected by an order of the King in 
council. Lord Chatham, who was still able to communicate with his 
colleagues by letter, concurred in this advice, and the measure was 
carried into effect. It was popular in itself, but rendered odious by the 
manner in which it was defended. I have already mentioned the scrape 
into which the government was on this occasion precipitated by the in- 
discretion and intemperance of Lord Northington, now president of the 
Council.* He ought to have been thrown overboard, and the found- 
ering vessel would have righted. Lord Camden thought that he must 
be supported, and was so far misled by his zeal to serve a colleague, as 
to persuade himself (in trying to persuade others) that the act of inter- 
fering with lawful commerce, although-against an express statute, was 
not only justifiable from expedience, so as to entitle the parties con- 
cerned in it to be protected by an indemnity, but was in itself strictly 

[Dec. 1766.] legal, and without any idem might be defended in 

a court of justice.—According to the evidence of credible 
witnesses present, he at last worked himself up to say :—‘* The neces- 
sity of a measure renders it not only excusable, but legal; and conse- 
quently a judge, when the necessity is proved, may, without hesitation, 
declare that act legal which would be clearly illegal where such necessity 
did not exist. The Crown is the sole executive power, and is therefore 
intrusted by the constitution to take upon itself whatever the safety of 
the state may require during the recess of Parliament, which is at most 
but a forty days tyranny. The power exercised on this occasion was 
so moderate, that Junius Brutus would not have hesitated to intrust it 
even to the discretion of a Nero.” 

He now received from Lord Temple the severest chastisement ever 


* Ante, p. 183. + Lord Charlemont’s Correspondence, p. 22. 


LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN. 219 


inflicted upon him, ‘ Forty days’ tyranny !” exclaimed his opponent. 
‘« My Lords, tyranny is a harsh sound. I detest the very word be- 
cause | hate the thing. But is this language to come from a noble and 
learned Lord, whose glory it might and ought to be to have risen by 
steps which liberty threw in his way, and to have been honoured as his 
country has honoured him, not for trampling her under foot, but for 
holding up her head. I have used my best endeavours to answer the 
argument of the ‘ forty days’ by argument founded on principles ; I 
will now give the noble and learned lord one answer more, and it shall 
be argumentum ad hominem, ‘That noble and learned Lord has said, 
T believe, on other occasions, and he has said well, the price of one 
hour’s English liberty none but an English jury could estimate, and 
juries under his guidance have put a very high value upon it, in the 
case of the meanest of our fellow subjects when oppressed by the ser- 
vants of the state. But ‘ forty days’ tyranny’ over the nation by the 
crown! Whocan endure the thought? My Lords, less than ‘ forty 
days’ tyranny’ such as this country has felt in some times, would, I 
believe, bring your Lordships together without a summons, from your 
sick beds, faster than our great patriots themselves, to get a place or a 
pension, or both,* and for aught I know make the subject of your con- 
sultation that appeal to Heaven which has been spoken of. Once 
establish a dispensing power, and you cannot be sure of either liberty 
or law for forty minuies.”t Lord Mansfield, more calmly but not less 
forcibly, pointed out the fallacy and the dangerous consequences of the 
Chancellor’s reasoning, and on this occasion gained a signal triumph 
over his rival, There can be no doubt that Lord Camden was con- 
founding acts which the law says may be lawfully done in a case of 
necessity — with acts done in violation of the law for the public 
goo1,—and that his doctrines led inevitably to a power in the Crown 
to suspend or repeal all laws, without the previous or subsequent sanc- 
tion of Parliament. The doctrine has never since been contended for ; 
and whenever ministers, for the safety of the state, have acted con- 
trary to law, they have thrown themselves upon Parliament, and asked 
for a bill of indemnity. 





* Lord Camden was often taunted with his retired allowance, under the name of 
* pension.” 

t Adolph. Hist. i. 290. 

{ “The opposition acknowledged the rectitude of the measure ; but we were not 
to be justified on the ground on which the cabinet thought fit at first to take up the 
business, by supporting it as maintainable under the Salus Populi Suprema Lex, 
and we had the mortification, after two days’ debate, to stoop to a Bill of Indemnity, 
which ought to have been proposed in the beginning..... In the struggle for and 
against the necessity of passing the Indemnity Bill, it was curious to see Lord 
Mansfield bestriding the high horse of Liberty, while Lord Chatham and Lord 
Camden were arguing for the extension of prerogative beyond its true limits; and it 
was in these debates that the npright Chancellor, in the warmth of speaking, inad- 
vertently made use of the expression, ‘that if it was a tyranny, it was only a tyranny 
of forty days.’””—Duke of Grafton’s Journal. 

“With regard to Lord Camden, the truth is, that he inadvertently overshot him. 
self, as appears plainly by that unguarded mention of a tyranny of forty days, which 
I myself heard. Instead of asserting that the proclamation was legal, he should 
have said, ‘ My Lords, 1 know that the proclamution was illegal, but 1 advised it 


220 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


The government, rendered unpopular by this exhibition, was soon 
se : es: 

[Junn, 1769.] entirely deprived of all assistance from Lord Cha 
ham, who was unable to attend either the debates in 
the House of Lords, or the meetings of the Cabinet, and shut up in his 
house at Hayes, refused to correspond on business with his colleagues, 
or with the King. In a fit of national fatuity, which we can only ex- 
plain by supposing that it was inflicted as a special visitation from 
Heaven for the sins of the people,—within a few months after the re- 
peal of the American Stamp Act, there was passed, without opposition, 
and almost without public observation, the fatal act imposing a duty on 
tea and other commodities when imported into the colonies,—which led 
to the non-consumption combination,—to the riots at Boston—to civil 
war—to the dismemberment of the empire. How Lord Camden should 
have suffered it to pass through the House of Lords in silence, I profess 
myself wholly at a loss to conjecture ; it was not only impolitic, but, 
according to his doctrine, it was wltra vires parliamenti, and to be 
treated as a nullity; for to justify this by calling it “a commercial 
regulation,” would only be rendering more contemptible his fimsy and 
fallacious distinction between a power to regulate commerce, and a 

power to impose a tax.* 

After Parliament was prorogued, Lord Camden had very nearly ~ 
been deprived of the Great Seal, when he had held it 

[Sepr. 1767.] ;. é : 

little more than a year,—and for his fame as a 
minister there is great reason to regret his continuance in office. Lord 
Chatham’s health was deemed irrecoverably gone, and Charles Towns- 
hend, with the concurrence of the King, had arranged a new adminis- 
tration, in which he himself was to have been First Lord of the Trea- 
sury, and Charles Yorke was to have been his Lord Chancellor,— 
when the plan was rendered abortive by his sudden and lamented 
death, in the flower of his age. 
because it was indispensably necessary to save the kingdom from famine; and I 
submit myself to the justice and mercy of my country.’ Such language as this 
would have been merely rational and consistent ;—not unfit for a lawyer, and very 
worthy of a great man,”—Puico Junius, 15th Oct. 1771. 

We are amazed at Lord Camden’s “ rorry pays’ TyrANNy,”’ but it is remarkable 
that there is hardly any public man who has not, at some time or other, indiscreetly 
used some expression which has passed into a by-word against him. I might men- 
tion Lord Melbourne’s “heavy blow and great discouragement to the Church,” 
Lord John Russell’s “ finality of the Reform Bill,” and Lord Lyndhurst’s “aliens in 
blood, language, and religion.” I myself had the honour of having 50,000 copies 
of a speech, which I made in the House of Commons when Attorney-General, 
printed and industriously distributed in every borough in England with freemen 
possessing the right of voting for members of Parliament, because I very indiscreetly 


said (what was very true) that the “right of freemen to vote was the plague-spot én 
our representative system.” 

* Ten years afterwards, when the sowing of the wind was producing the whirl- 
wind, Lord Camden being taunted with his sanctioning of the tax, he said, “I con- 
fess, as mere matter of supposition, the conjecture is plausibly supported, but the 
fact was entirely otherwise. I never did, nor ever will, give my consent to raising 
any tax in any form on the people of America for the purpose of raising a revenue 
to be under the disposal of the British Parliament.”,—18 Parl. Hist. 1222. His 
confidential correspondence with the Duke of Grafton had not then commenced. 


LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN. 224 


Then followed the arrangement called the “ Duke of Grafton’s admi- 
nistration,’ in which he was recognised as prime minister. Lord 
Chatham still retained the Privy Seal, and was supposed to be a mem- 
ber of the cabinet, but he remained entirely sequestered from public 
business under circumstances which will never be fully explained. 

Lord Camden did not concur in all the opinions of the First Lord of 
the Treasury, but greatly preferred him to the Duke of Bedford, Lord 
Shelburne, or any other Whig leader, and the closest friendship was 
established between them. To this we are indebted for the letters [am 
about to introduce, which will be found to throw a new light upon the 
state of parties, and the history of the country from this time, till the 
reins of government were placed in the hands of Lord North. 

An important question soon arose, whether the Great Seal of Ireland 
should be held by an Irish oran English lawyer? Lord Townshend was 
then Lord Lieutenant, and for the sake of popularity, being naturally de- 
sirous of having an Irishman, had brought over the Duke of Grafton to 
the same opinion. However, Lord Camden being consulted by him, 
wrote back the following answer :— 


* Bath, Sept. 27, 1767. 
*« My dear Lord Duke, 

‘*<T have since the receipt of your Grace’s letter turned my thoughts 
upon the subject of it with the most serious attention, and am displeased 
with myself for not agreeing altogether with your Grace in conferring 
the Irish Seal upon an Irishman. I will readily confess that I am not 
a competent judge of this question, for want of knowing the true state 
of that country, the manner in which it has been governed of late years, 
the power and influence of the several connexions, and, aboye all, the 
importance of the Irish bar in the House of Commons there ; and there- 
fore it is very likely that your Grace may be much better enabled than 
myself to form a true judgment upon the utility and policy of compli- 
menting the Irish with the high office. Your Grace, however, has a 
right to my poor opinion, such as it is; and indeed, my Lord, I am 
very loath to give up to the unreasonable demands of two of those bar- 
risters (however eminent) the last as well as most important law office 
in that kingdom, which England hitherto has thought fit to reserve to 
herself. All the chiefs upon each bench were formerly named from 
hence; the Irish have acquired the King’s Bench, and the late Lord 
Lieutenant, for the first time, made them a present of the Chief Baron ; 
and there has not for many years been an instance of a puisne judge 
sent from this country; I believe Baron Mounteney was the last. 

“Thus, by degrees, has this country surrendered up all the great 
offices of the law, except only the Common Pleas and the Great Seal ; 
and I much doubt whether this country acquires any advantage by all 
these concessions. 

‘In the last session, Mr. Flood moved a general censure upon the 
characters and capacity of the Judges sent from England, with a view, 
no doubt, of inflaming the people against all these nominations, in hopes 


222 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


of extending their encroachments to a total exclusion of the English 
from the Irish bench; and now, such is the danger of precedent, they 
threaten general opposition (for so I understood from Lord Clare) if this 
favour is refused, and your Grace seems to think it will be an affront 
upon the next Council there. 

«Jocelyn and Bowes, though both Englishmen, are honoured with 
the appellation of Irish for the ‘present purpose, and are cited as prece- 
dents in their favour. I am very apprehensive, that if your Grace 
should indulge now the Irish in this demand (for I can call it by no 
other name), the precedent will bind England for ever; for national 
favours once conferred can never be resumed. Ireland has reason 
enough to be discontented with the mother country: the popular party 
are sure to distress the Castle to some degree every session, and the 
method has been hitherto to win over the leaders in the House of Com- 
mons, by places, pensions, and honours, which has enabled the Lord 
Lieutenant for the time being to close his particular session with ease 
to himself; at the same time that it has ruined the King’s affairs, and 
enraged the people. ‘The next successor is involved in the same diffi- 
culties, and his convenience has been complimented by the like mea- 
sures ; till, at last, by this profusion of rewards, the Government has 
nothing to give, and is left beggared, and consequently unsupported. 
In such a state of things, would your Grace wish to pursue such a plan, 
and grant now, before the opening of the session, the highest post in the 
law to che member only of the House of Commons (for only one can 
have it), whose removal afterwards to make room for an Englishman 
(let his behaviour be ever so obnoxious) would be a most odious and 
unpopular measure in that country? An Englishman in the office is 
expected to remain an Englishman, and is permitted; an Irishman an- 
glicised would never be endured. Indeed, my Lord, the very yielding, 
in my humble opinion, would be a weakening of government, and be 
more pernicious than the most troublesome session, 

“T.am truly sensible of Lord Townshend’s embarrassments, and 
foresee that, if he should not obtain this boon, he must expect to meet 
with some very disagreeable struggles. But, I dare say, his zeal, 
courage, and ability are equal to the whole, and I am sure he will 
cheerfully undertake what he has accepted, though your Grace should 
adhere to our first opinion, of keeping the Seal, for the present, in 
commission. 

* Your Grace will be pleased to consider that the Chancellor, Chief 
Baron, and Chief Justices, are called to the Council in Ireland in the 
quality of statesmen, and that the Council in that country is an as- 
sembly of equal importance of either branches of the legislature. If the 
Lord Lieutenant is surrounded with Irish only filling these offices at the 
board, he is subject to be overruled in every quarter by the great chiefs 
of the law, in which case I doubt he must submit. 

‘‘ But if your Grace should at last be determined to name an Irish- 
man, you will please to consider whether Sir A. Malone is not clearly 
the properest person. He has not indeed applied for it, but I under- 


LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN. 223 


stand he would be happy with the offer; and such is the deference to 
his superior character, that every one of those gentlemen who has ap- 
plied have put themselves only in the second place after him. So that, 
if your Grace is resolved upon an: Irishman, ‘ Detur dignissimo!’ Let 
it carry with it a march of public spirit, at the same time that it is a 
management of parties. I know your Grace will forgive my frank- 
ness: this is my present opinion, though I will most willingly submit 
to a contrary determination, and when your Grace has done it, | shall 
say in public that it is well done; indeed, I shall go near to think so, 
because I am sure the decision will be taken by those who understand 
Ireland better than I do. 

‘T presume your Grace has asked Lord N—— ’s* opinion on 
this subject; that will have great weight with me, as well as your 
Grace. He used to think as I do, as did Lord Chatham; but different 
circumstances may well bring about a change of opinion. 

*«] know your Grace will be anxious to hear some news of Lord 
Chatham; if I had been able to have given you any authentic intelli- 
gence of his amendment to any considerable degree, I should have 
wrote before. The whole country in his neighbourhood report him 
much better; but his knocker is tied up, and he. is inaccessible. I read 
a letter from Lady Chatham yesterday, who is so fearful of owning my 
Lord to be better, that she retracts it, even while she is admitting it in 
the same sentence, and conveys hopes of his recovery while she forbids 
them. I verily believe he is considerably mended. 

‘<T propose to be in town on Monday morning, the 7th of next month, 
to prorogue the Parliament, at eleven o’clock in the morning, if your 
Grace will be so good as to order the proper preparations,—to go to 
Court,—to swear in Lord North, and set out immediately for my re- 
turn. I hope this will be permitted. 

*«] have the honour to be, with the most perfect respect and esteem, 
your Grace’s 





“ Most obedient faithful Servant, 
“ CaMDEN,” 


Lord ‘Townshend stiil pressed very hard for the appointment of an 
Irish lawyer, and in a letter to Lord Camden, said,—*t This measure is 
the very criterion of an odious or a popular administration ; if the con- 
cession is not granted, it will be a proof of my own insignificance, and 
the safest course will be for me to confess it to all mankind.” Lord 
Camden, therefore, wrote to the Duke of Grafton :— aie 
‘‘When such language is used, there are but two LSeptve tal Bid 

guage is used, 
things to be done—to quarrel or to submit. The first being, at this 
time, to the last degree improvident and dangerous, which his Lordship 
well knows makes the latter necessary.” However, the Cabinet re- 
solved on resistance, as appears by the following letter from Lord 
Camden to the Duke of Grafton :— 


* Lord Northington’s. 


224 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


‘JT find by your Grace’s letter, and one I received from Lord Shei- 
burne, that I am called upon to name a person for the Irish Seal. He 
must be eminent, and one who at this ticklish juncture would be every 
way fit for the office. I doubt it will be too much for me, in such a 
dearth of men willing to accept, to recommend one who will answer 
that description, nor dare I undertake it without the sanction of a cabinet. 
The whole business is, indeed, a state question, and does not properly 
fall within my department.” Mr, Serjeant Hewitt, afterwards Lord 
Lifford, was fixed upon. 

The Duke of Grafton says in his Journal,—‘ Lord Northington’s 
opinion concurred so fully with Lord Camden’s on the disposal of the 
Great Seal of Ireland, that the Cabinet was persuaded not to give way 
to Lord ‘Townshend’s reasoning in favour of an Irish lawyer’s holding 
it, and | am persuaded that our firmness gave more real consideration 
to his Lordship’s situation, and dignity and weight to his government, 
than any yielding of his own would have effected. Before Parliament 
met, Mr. Serjeant Hewitt accepted the Seal, with every good disposi- 
tion to discharge properly the great trust put into his hands, and his 
learning as a lawyer sanctioned our expectations from the appointment. 
He was a true Whig, and bore a character to which all parties gave 
their assent of respect; and though his speeches in Parliament were 
long, and without eloquence, they were replete with excellent matter, 
and knowledge of the law. His conduct in Ireland, under the peerage 
of Lifford, soon gained the esteem of the public.” 

Lord Camden’ s views on this subject were tinged by the prejudices 
which then subsisted in England, respecting the ‘subjection of Ireland, 
The two countries must now be considered on a footing of perfect 
equality, and the only consideration is, what is most conducive to their 
mutual interest?) That great statesman, Lord Wellesley, proposed (I 
think wisely) as a solution of this question,—that there should be one 
bar for England and Ireland, and that while lawyers practising in 
England should be occasionally appointed to preside in the Courts of 
Justice in Ireland, lawyers practising in Ireland should be reciprocally 
appointed to preside in the Courts of Justice in England. 

Public affairs rernained in a state of considerable tranquillity till the 
sudden re-appearance in England of the notorious John Wilkes, which 
threw the whole nation into a ferment. After the popularity he had 
acquired by establishing the illegality of ‘* general warrants” and of 
‘“‘ the seizure of papers by authority of the Secretary of State,” he had 
been convicted of publishing seditious and obscene libels ; he had been 
outlawed ; and he had lived in exile. Having failed in negotiations toe 
obtain a pardon, he now boldly presented himself at the hustings as a 
candidate to represent the city of London in Parliament, Being de- 
feated there, he started for Middlesex, and he was returned for this 

[Marcu 28, 1768.] county by a great majority, being supported by 
a mob, who compelled all who appeared in the 

streets and highways to join in the ery of « Wilkes and Liberty!” The 
Government was most seriously alarmed, and Lord Camden, with the 


LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN. 225 


other ministers, being summoned to attend a meeting of the Cabinet, 
wrote the following letter to the Duke of Grafton : 


“ Bath, April 3, 1768. 
** My dear Lord Duke, 

‘¢ Whatever vexation and inconvenience | may feel at this unexpected 
summons, which calls me from hence above a week before the time, 
yet I shall, without fail, give my attendance at the time appointed. 
The event is disagreeable and unforeseen, for I am persuaded that no 
person living, after Wilkes had been defeated in London, would have 
thought it possible for him to have carried his election for the county of 
Middlesex. Sure I am, that if the Government had arrested him while 
he was a candidate, this step would have secured his election, and would 
have been considered as the cause of his success, I cannot pretend, at 
this distance, without further information, to advise what proceedings 
are now necessary, as the only subject for consideration seems to be, 
what measures are to be taken by the House of Commons at the meet- 
ing of Parliament. If the precedents and the constitution will warrant 
an expulsion, that perhaps may be right. A criminal flying his country 
to escape justice—a convict and an outlaw! That such a person 
should, in open daylight, thrust himself upon the country as a candi- 
date, his crime unexpiated,—is audacious beyond description. This is 
the light in which I consider the affair; the riot only inflaming the 
business, and not showing the weakness of the Government more than 
any other election riot in the kingdom. But it would be well to con- 
sider what may be the consequences if W. should be re-elected. ‘That 
is very serious. [ take it for granted that he will surrender, and re- 
ceive judgment in the K. Bench, the first day of the Term,—when, I 
suppose, the outlawry will be reversed, and he will be imprisoned. We 
expect him at this place to-night, where, I suppose, he intends to re- 
main till the Term ; and this town is not a little alarmed lest the same 
spirit of violence should follow him hither. But, I trust, we are not mad 
enough here to follow the example of the metropolis. Whatever may 
be the heat of the present moment, I am persuaded it will soon subside, 
and this gentleman will lose his popularity in a very short time after 
men have recovered their senses. 

“Tam, é&c.” 


At the Cabinet all present appear to have acquiesced in the determi- 
nation that Wilkes should immediately be expelled the House of Com- 
mons ; but when it appeared that the demagogue, instead of submitting 
to his sentence, meant to insist that the outlawry was erroneous,—that 
all the proceedings against him were void,—and that he was entitled to 
be treated as an innocent man,—the Chancellor quailed, and thus ad- 
dressed the Premier : 


VOL. V. 15 


226 REIGN OF GEORGE TIL 


“20th April, 1768, 
«¢ My dear Lord, 


««[ dare say you have been informed of what passed to- day i in the 
Court of King’s Bench, and that Mr. W. is still at large. His counsel, 
however, promised that he should be forthcoming in custody, and then 
move to be bailed; sue out a writ of error and reverse the outlawry. 
They gave notice, likewise, that they intended, after they had got rid of 
the outlawry, to move in arrest of judgment. Your Grace will be 
pleased to perceive that Mr. W. stands at present convicted only by 
verdict ; and if there shall appear to be any material defect in the re- 
cord, that the judgment must be stayed ; in which case he must be dis- 
charged, and he becomes a freeman upon this prosecution as much as 
if he had never been convicted. I dare say your Grace will see, upon 
this short representation, that till judgment is finally pronounced 
against Mr. W. by the Court, no man has a right to pronounce him 
guilty, This appears to mea real difficulty attending the measure, 
which yesterday we thought so clear. For how can the House expel a 
member, either as an outlaw or a convict, while the suit is pending, 
whereas he may turn out at last to be neither the one nor the other. I 
am afraid, considering the necessary delay in courts of Jaw, it will be 
impossible for the King’s Bench to give judgment before the Parliament 
meets, and therefore it deserves the most serious consideration whether 
the proposed measure should be pursued while the obstacle stands in 
the way. 


‘© [ have the honour,” &c. 


The motion for the expulsion was accordingly deferred till, the out- 
lawry being reversed, sentence of imprisonment for a year and ten 
months was pronounced on Wilkes, and he insulted Parliament by a 
virulent libel, which, at the bar of the lower House, he avowed and 
boasted of. His expulsion was then carried, and a new writ was 
ordered to elect another representative for Middlesex. ‘This proceed- 
ing, though impolitic, cannot be considered unlawful or unconstitu- 
tional ; for there might be a presumption that his constituents would not 
have elected a person guilty of such misconduct, and it might be fair to 
give them an opportunity of determining whether they would still have 
him for their representative. 

I am glad to think that the subsequent proceedings respecting the 
Middlesex election were not sanctioned by Lord Camden; for I believe 
that all mankind are now agreed that the House of Commons acted 
illegally and unconstitutionally in again expelling Mr. Wilkes fora sup- 
posed offence committed before his re-election,—in declaring him dis- 
qualified to serve in Parliament,—and in seating Mr, Lutterell as re- 
presentative for Middlesex, although he had only a small minority of 
the electors in his favour, The Chancellor is by no means exempted 
from blame for consenting to belong to an administration which over- 
ruled his opinion upon such questions. Although we may account for 
his continuing in office while he could be considered as having Lord 


LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN. 227 


Chatham for a colleague, it aay astonish us exceedingly that he still 
condescended to hold the Great Seal after his great chief had resigned, 
and was at open enmity with the government. But he was placed in 
a most painful situation; Lord Chatham was still unable to appear in 
Parliament, and there was no statesman with whom he thought he 
could better co-operate for the public good than the present head of the 
Treasury. 

The three following letters to the Duke of Grafton explain the re- 
moval of Lord Shelburne from the government, the consequent resigna- 
tion of Mr, Pitt, and Lord Camden’s perplexity : 


“29th Sept. 1768, 

‘“¢T understand your Grace’s plan is fixt, and I saw plainly the last 
time I was in town that Lord S ’s removal was determined. What 
can J say to it, my dear Lord? It is unlucky. 

“The administration, since Lord Chatham’s illness, is almost en- 
tirely altered, without being changed, and I find myself surrounded with 
persons to whom I[ am scarce known, and with whom I have no con- 
nexion. Lord Chatham is at Hayes, brooding over his own suspicions 
and discontents, His return to business almost desperate, inaccessible to 
everybody, but under a persuasion (as I have some reason to conjecture) 
that he is given up and abandoned. This measure, for aught I know, 
may fix his opinion, and bring him to a resolution of resigning. If that 
should happen, I should be under the greatest difficulty. 

“fam truly, my dear Lord, distressed. I have seen so much of 
courts that I am heartily tired of my employment, and should be happy 
to retire upon a scanty income if an honourable opportunity offered to 
justify my retreat to the King and your Grace—but that step I will never 
take without your consent, till I find I have not the King’s favour and 
your confidence, unless I should be forced by something more compel- 
ling than the Earl of S ’s removal. 

*“« After all, though your Grace is so good as to relieve me from any 
opinion on the subject, yet the case being stated as it is, that either your 
Grace or the Earl must quit, my opinion is clear, in a moment, that 
your Grace must remain. 








“Tam, &c.” 


“ 14th Oct. 1768. 

‘“« My concern upon the intelligence contained in your Grace’s letter 
is inexpressible, and though I was apprehensive that Lord Shelburne’s 
dismission would make a deep impression upon Lord Chatham’s mind, 
yet I did not expect this sudden resignation. [ will still live in hope 
that his Majesty’s letter mav produce an alteration, because there is a 
possibility, though at the same time I do not flatter myself with any san- 
guine expectations, Your Grace and I feel for each other. To me I 
fear the blow is fatal, yet I shall come to no determination, If I 
can find out what is fit for me to do in this most distressed situation, 
that I must do; but the difficnlty lies in forming a true judgment. 


228 REIGN OF GEORGE IIL 


Whatever my decision may be, I will never resign my active endeavours 
to support the King’s service, or my unchangeable attachment to your 
Grace. This most unfortunate event will throw the King’s affairs into 
a state of utter distraction. Perhaps order may spring up out of this 
confusion. I do assure your Grace that my mind is at present in too 
great an agitation to be soon settled, and therefore I do not give myself 
leave to form any opinion concerning my own conduct: [ shall wait 
with impatience to hear the conclusion, and am, with the truest zeal and 
attachment, &c.,”” 


“ Bath, 16th Oct. 1768. 

“« Your Grace’s intelligence does not surprise me: I expected it, and 
predetermined my own journey to London before I had the honour of 
your Grace’s letter. Unfortunately one of my children is so ill that 
I must wait a day or two before I set out, in order to see what turn 
her distemper will take. I propose, however, to be in town on Wed- 
nesday next, or Thursday at the latest. 

“* Nothing could give me so much satisfaction as to join with your 
Grace in one line of conduct, and yet I see plainly that our situations 
are different, and the same honour due to the King and regard to the 
public operating upon two minds equally aiming at the same end, may 
possibly draw us different ways ; but I dare say your Grace will believe 
me, in all events and circumstances, what I really am, 

‘* With all respect and unfeigned attachment,” &c. 


On his return to London, he heard such an account of Lord Chatham 
as to convince him that the country was for ever deprived of the services 
of this illustrious patriot, and agreeing to support the present govern- 
ment, he prevailed on Mr. Dunning to follow his example.* 

The dispute with the colonies was now assuming a most alarming 
aspect, the act so heedlessly passed to impose a duty on goods imported 
into America having produced the discontent and the resistance which 
might have been expected from it. Lord Camden’s views upon the sub- 
ject were most liberal and enlightened, and if he had been listened to, 
he would have saved the Empire from civil war and dismemberment. 
In the prospect of the meeting of Parliament, having been consulted by 
the Prime Minister respecting the King’s Speech, he thus replied :— 

«‘ As to North America, before a speech can be sketched upon the 
subject, it is necessary to know what measures the King’s ministers in- 
tend to pursue, for the speech and the address must mark the outlines 
of these measures. 

«¢T was a long time in hopes that Massachusetts Bay would have been 
the only disobedient colony. It would have been no difficult matter. to 
have dealt with them if the others had sat still and remained passive ; 
but I am deceived in that expectation, for it is now manifest that the 
whole continent will unite and make it common cause. We are drifted 


* Note to Duke of Grafton, dated 4th Nov. “I sat late in Court, and have just 
dined. Mr. Dunning stays in his office at my request.” _ 


LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN. 999 
by I know not what fatality upon Mr. Grenville’s ground. We are 
pressed on the one hand by the declaratory law, and on the other by 
the colonies’ resolute denial of parliamentary authority. The issue is 
now joined upon the v¢ght which, in my apprehension, is the most un- 
toward that could have been started—fatal to Great Britain if she mis- 
carries—unprofitable if she succeeds. For if it is (as I believe your 
Grace thinks with me it is) expedient to tax the Colonies, as we all 
maintained when the Stamp Act was repealed,—alter both sides are half 
ruined in the contest, we shall at last establish a right which ought never 
to be exerted. 

‘If the Americans are able to practise so much self-denial as to sub- 
sist only for one twelvemonth without British commodities, I do very 
much fear that they will carry their point without striking a blow. Pa- 
tience and perseverance in this one measure will ruin us; and | am the 
more apt to dread this event, because it seems to me that the colonies 
are more sober, and consequently more determined, in the present oppo- 
sition than they were upon the Stamp Act. For except only the riots at 
Boston, I see nothing like active rebellion in the other provinces. If 
this should happen, the merchants and manufacturers here at home will 
be clamorous, and half our own people will be added to the American 
party. 

** Your Grace will ask, upon this representation of things, what 2s to 
be done? Indeed, my dear Lord, I do not know what is best to advise. 
The Parliament, I presume, cannot repeal the act in question, because 
that would admit the American principle to be right, and their own doc- 
trine erroneous. Therefore I conclude the Parliament will not repeal, 
consequently must execute the law, and this of course must be the lan- 
guage of the Speech. 

‘*The method how to execute it is the next consideration, and here | 
am as much ata loss. There is no pretence for violence anywhere but 
at Boston. That is the ringleading province, and if any country is to 
be chastised, the punishment ought to be levelled there. I have been 
sometimes thinking, that if the act was repealed in favour of the other 
provinces, excepting Massachusetts Bay, and there executed with proper 
rigour, such a measure might be successful. But Jam aware that no 
man, perhaps, but myself, could be brought to relish such’a concession, 
as almost everybody else holds the declaratory law to be a sound fun- 
damental one, never to be departed from. 

‘“‘T submit to the declaratory law, and have thought it my duty upon 
that ground, as a minister, to exert my constitutional power to carry the 
duty act into execution. But as a member of the legislature I cannot 
bring myself to advise violent measures to support a plan so inexpedient 
and impolitic, and I am very much afraid (I speak this confidentially to 
your Grace) that if a motion should be made to repeal the bill, I] should 
be under the necessity to vote for it. But there are so few in my way 
of thinking, that such a motion is not to be expected. 

“T am very sensible that a difference of opinion upon a subject so 
serious and important may be prejudicial to the administration, and I 


230 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


lament the occasion, being persuaded that a most perfect union amongst 
us is essential, and I will labour to effect it with my best endeavours, 
But I do fear, most exceedingly, that upon the American question the 
Bedfords and myself will be too far asunder to meet. I must maintain 
my own ground, The public knows my opinion and knows theirs, 
Neither of us can be inconsistent with ourselves. 

«‘ This letter is to your Grace only. You are my Pole Star, Lord 
Chatham being eclipsed. I had rather see your Grace at the head of 
government than any other man in the kingdom, and therefore | have 
disclosed to you my whole heart upon this ill-fated business, I am 
sensible that my sentiments do not altogether coincide with your Grace’s 
opinion. 

“There is nothing | dread so much as a war with America. I shall 
be very happy to know the result of your councils in town upon this 
subject.—Corsica is rather a delicate than a difficult business,”* 

Lord Camden’s advice was entirely disregarded. He had, in like 
manner, quarrelled with his colleagues respecting the Middlesex election. 
Still he made an effort to save Dunning, who continuing in office at his 
request, had given great offence to Lord North, now léader of the House 
of Commons, by insisting on one occasion that Wilkes should be heard 
before he was condemned. ‘Thus he appealed to the Premier: 


“10th Dec. 1768. 
‘‘ ] had an opportunity, after [ saw your Grace yesterday, of hearing 
an account of what passed in the House of Com- 
Cat ea mons, and [I find the debate turned upon this : 
‘ Whether they should vote the paper a libel before Wilkes was heard 
in his defence ?’ and, that this was no question on the merits, but only 
discourse upon the mode of proceeding: that the Solicitor-General 
thought, if Mr. Wilkes was to be heard, he ought regularly to be at 
liberty to speak to the nature and quality of the paper, as well as to the 
fact of writing and publishing. And indeed, my dear lord, I am of the 
same opinion ; and J do verily believe that no lawyer can hold a diffe- 
rent language. The Solicitor said that, difficult as the task would be 
for Mr. W. to maintain an argument that the paper was no libel, yet 
he ought not to be precluded from that argument,—which he would be 
if the House determined it to be a libel. I do not see how they can, 
consistent with the terms of justice, pronounce the paper to be a libel 
till they have heard him. Now, my dear Lord, give me leave to say 
that Lord North should not be quite so much offended with Mr, Dun- 
ning, because the matter before the House was rather a discourse upon 
the method of proceeding than a measure of administration. I do not 
believe Mr, D. will be so base as to remain in office, and not to be hearty 
in the support of administration. I have the honour,” &c. 


* We owe the foregoing letters to the circumstance of the Chancellor having 
passed the autumn at Bath, while the Prime Minister was at Euston: “ Lord 
Camden and myself unfortunately saw less of each other than in other summers— 
both of us profiting by a retreat into the country of the leisure which a recess from 
Chancery and Treasury business offered.”— Duke of Grafton’s Journal, 1768. 


LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN. 231 


This application was successful, and Dunning continued in office till 
after Lord Camden’s own removal. 

The ministers found they were getting into such tremendous diffi- 
culties respecting the Middlesex election by contemning the Chancellor’s 
advice, that the Prime Minister wrote to him, specially inviting him to 
attend a Cabinet to be held upon the subject. The following was his 


answer: , 


“9th January, 1769. 
‘¢ My dear Lord, 

“| have the honour of your Grace’s letter, and will certainly attend 
the meeting of the Kinw’s servants on Wednesday morning next. Ido 
wish, most heartily, that the present time could be eased of the difficulties 
that Mr. W.’s business has brought upon the Government: a fatality 
has attended it from the beginning, and it grows more serious every 
day. Your Grace and I have unfortunately differed. I wish it had 
been otherwise. It is a hydra, multiplying by resistance, and gather- 
ing strength by every attempt to subdue it. As the times are, I had 
rather pardon W. than punish him. ‘This is a _ political opinion, inde- 
pendent of the merits of the cause. 

“Tam very glad to hear the holydays have given your Grace so 
happy a respite. They have been to me a perfect paradise, as I have 
employed my whole time in studying the Douglas cause, and my mind 
has been totally vacant from political vexations. 

‘© T have the honour,” &c. 


He attended the meeting, but with no good effect. The Duke of 
Grafton treated him with great civility, and was inclined to be governed 
by his opinion ; but what he laid down respecting the law and the con- 
stitution was scornfully received by all the others.—From thenceforth 
he constantly absented himself from the Cabinet when the two great 
subjects of internal and colonial policy were to be discussed—Wilkes 
and American coercion, 

The public were not then in possession of these secrets. For two 
years it was remarked that he preserved an impenetrable silence in 
Parliament, unless when, as Speaker, he put the question, and declared 
the majority ; but no one suspected that he had, in reality, ceased to be 
a member of the government.* 

At last, when Parliament reassembled in the beginning of January, 
1770, the Lord Chancellor spoke out. Lord Chat- [Jan. 9, 1770.] 
ham, after his resignation,—to the astonishment of all 
mankind, not only experienced a great relaxation of his bodily infirmi- 
ties, but recovered the full energy of his gigantic intellect. On the first 
day of the session he was in his place, though supported on crutches 
and swathed in flannel, and having delivered a most violent speech 


* The reports of the debates respecting the Middlesex election and America at 
this time generally conclude with the words, “ The Lord Chancellor was silent.”— 
16 Parl. Hist. 477. 


232 REIGN OF GEORGE IIL. 


against the measures of the Government, affirming that the liberty of 
the subject had been invaded, not only in the colonies, but at home, he 
moved as an amendment to the address, that ‘‘ the House would with 
all convenient speed take into consideration the causes of the present 
discontents, and particularly the proceedings of the House of Commons 
touching the incapacity of John Wilkes, Esq., depriving the electors of 
Middlesex of their free choice ofa representative.””* 

Lord Mansfield having taken up the defence of the Government, and 
insinuated that all their measures must be considered as having the full 
approbation of the noble and learned Lord who held the Great Seal— 
“ever considered the champion of popular rights,”’—the Lord Chan- 
cellor left the woolsack, and in a burst of indignation tried to defend 
his conduct and his consistency. ‘I accepted the Great Seal,” said 
he, “ without conditions: I meant not therefore to be trammelled by his 
Majesty (I beg pardon) by his Ministers ; but I have suffered myself to 
be so too long. For some time I have beheld, with silent indignation, 
the arbitrary measures of the Minister; I have often drooped and hung 
down my head in Council, and disapproved by my looks those steps 
which I knew my avowed opposition could not prevent. J will do so 
no longer; but openly and boldly speak my sentiments. I now pro- 
claim to the world, that I entirely coincide in the opinion expressed by 
my noble friend, whose presence again reanimates us, respecting this 
unconstitutional and illegal vote of the House of Commons. If, in 
giving my opinion as a Judge, I were to pay any respect to that vote, I 
should look upon myself as a traitor to my trust, and an enemy to my 
country. By their violent and tyrannical conduct, Ministers have 
alienated the minds of the people from his Majesty’s government—I had 
almost said, from his Majesty’s person. In consequence, a spirit of 
discontent has spread itself into every corner of the kingdom, and is 
every day increasing; insomuch, that if some methods are not devised 
to appease the clamours so universally prevalent, I know not, my 
Lords, whether the people in despair may not become their own aven- 
gers, and take the redress of grievances into their own hands.” t 

The amendment being negatived, Lord Rockingham moved that 
the’ Lords be summoned for the following day, when he should make a 
proposal of great national importance: but it being evident that after 
this scene the government could not go on, Lord Weymouth, the Secre- 
tary of State, moved an adjonrnment for a week. Lord Temple said, 
‘“‘ the House well knows for what purpose the Lords opposite want an 
adjournment; it is to settle the disordered state of the administration, 


* It was in this debate that he so strikingly contrasted modern peers with their 
ancestors, who had won Magna Charta: ‘Those iron barons (for so I will call 
them when compared with the silken barons of modern days) were the guardians 
of the people ; yet their virtues were never engaged in a question of such importance 
as the present. A breach has been made in the constitution—the battlements are 
dismantled—the citadel is open to the first invader—the walls totter—the constitu- 
tion is not tenable. What remains, then, but for us to stand foremost in the breach, 
to repair or perish in it?” 

t+ 1 Adolphus, 390; 16 Parl. Hist. 644; Gent. Mag, Jan. 1770. 


LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN. 238 


which is now shattered in a most miserable manner, and, in all likeli- 
hood, will soon fall to pieces; their particular object is to dismiss the 
virtuous and independent Lord who sits on the woolsack, and to supply 
his place with some obsequious lawyer who will do as he is commanded.” 
Lord Shelburne added: “ After the dismission of the present worthy 
Chancellor, the Seals will go a-begging: but I hope there will not be 
found in the kingdom a wretch so base and mean-spirited as to accept 
of them on the conditions on which they must be offered.” 

The ministerial crisis which followed was one of the most exciting 
and memorable in our party annals, Lord Chatham, Lord Temple, 
and Lord Rockingham were now reconciled, and taking the same view 
of the questions which then divided the nation, might have formed a 
strong government with Lord Camden for their Chancellor,—on the 
basis of American conciliation, and of the reversal of the unconstitu- 
tional judgment at home, that a commoner was rendered disqualified to 
represent the people by a vote of the House of Commons. But the 
court was determined to make a vigorous effort to concoct an adminis- 
tration that would push on its favourite policy at home and abroad. A 
great difficulty was to obtain a lawyer of any reputation to take the 
Great Seal, as successor to Lord Camden,—particularly after the late 
denunciations in the House of Lords against all who should think of 
degrading themselves by basely doing so. Lord Camden, under the 
advice of his friends, determined that he would not voluntarily resign. 

Through persuasions, and with a result which I shall have to detail 
in the life of Charles Yorke, he was prevailed upon, in an evil hour, to 
agrée to accept the offer pressed upon him, although he condemned his 
own act at the instant, and soon fatally repented of it. 

Ou Wednesday, the 17th of January, 1770, about seven in the 
evening, Lord Camden, in pursuance of a summons he had received 
for that purpose, attended at the Queen’s Palace, and there surrendered 
the Great Seal into the King’s own hands, He slept sounder that 
night than he had done for many months. 

The very extraordinary circumstances in which he had been placed 
must apologise for his political conduct while in office. I am afraid it 
cannot be strictly justified. 

To the last hour of his holding the Great Seal, the exercise of his 
judicial functions met with universal approbation. [ ought not to pass 
over without notice, the admirable manner in which he disposed of 
appeals and writs of error in the House of Lords. Lord Mansfield, on 
those occasions, generally sat along with him. To the honour of my 
profession, and for the credit of the decisions of the tribunal judging in 
the last resort in this country, it should be known that, however strongly 
law Lords may differ on questions of party politics, they have always 
zealously co-operated in the endeavour satisfactorily to dispose of the 
juridical business of the House; and, with a few exceptions,—when the 
lay Peers have exercised their strict right, and tried to prevail by num- 
bers,—justice has been administered there with entire purity, and on 
the most enlightened principles. Lord Camden and Lord Mansfield 


234 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


sometimes attacking each other in debate so sharply, as almost to render 
a resolution necessary, that ‘they should be required to give an assu- 
rance that the matter should not go farther, or that they be taken into 
the custody of the Black Rod;” they never had the slightest difference 
of opinion in any case argued by counsel before them. 

Soon after Lord Camden had taken his seat on the woolsack, came 

[Fen. 4, 1767.] on the famous writ of error in Harrison v. Evans, in 

ove ‘4 which the question was, ‘‘ whether a Dissenter was 
liable to a fine for not serving a corporate office which he was dis- 
qualified from serving by the Corporation Act, he not having taken the 
sacrament of the Lord’s supper according to the rites of the Church of 
England?’ This arose out of an ingenious scheme to raise a tax upon 
the Dissenters in the City of London for the purpose of building the 
Manston Housr, which by law they could never enter. In the city 
courts judgment was given that the defendant was liable to the penalty 
of 6002. Lord Mansfield moved the reversal of the judgment in one 
of the finest specimens of forensic eloquence to be found in our books. 
Having shown that as the person whom the citizens pretended to choose 
for sheriff could not serve the office (as they well knew), this was 
merely an attempt to punish him for being a Dissenter, he said,— 
“Conscience, my Lords, is not controllable by human laws, nor 
amenable to human tribunals. Persecution or attempts to force con- 
science will never produce conviction, and can only be calculated to 
make hypocrites or martyrs.” Lord Camden rejoicing to hear such 
noble sentiments from the Lord Chief Justice of the King’s Bench, 
heartily concurred in them, and by the unanimous judgment of: the 
House a great triumph was given to religious liberty.* 

So when Wilkes’s case came to the bar of the House of Lords, Lord 
Camden and Lord Mansfield agreed on the two points which were 
raised on the record :—1, “* That the Solicitor-General when the office 
of Attorney-General is vacant, has authority by law to file a criminal in- 
formation ;f and, 2. “* That a defendant being convicted of two misde- 
meanours, may at the same time be sentenced to two periods of 
imprisonment, the second to commence after the expiration of the 
first.” 

But Lord Camden attracted chief notice while Chancellor by his 
[a. 0. 1769.] sndarient in the great Douglas cause, which, in Scotland, 

ad almost led to a civil war between the supporters of the 
opposite sides ; and in England even had excited more interest than 
any question of mere private right had ever done before. Archibald 
Douglas, the appellant, had been brought up as the son of Lady Jane 


* 16 Parl. Hist. 313; 3 Brown’s Parl. Cas. 465; Life of Sir Eardley Wilmot, 73. 

+ After the resignation of Charles Yorke as Attorney-General, before a successor 
had been appointed, Sir Fletcher Norton, as Solicitor-General, had filed the infor- 
mation against Wilkes for composing and publishing the North Briton, No. XLV. 

t Being convicted on this information, and on another for composing and pub- 
lishing the “ Essay on Woman,” besides being fined, he was sentenced on the first 
to be imprisoned ten calendar months, and on the second to be imprisoned twelve 
calendar months, to be computed from the determination of the first imprisonment, 


LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN. 235 


Douglas, and her husband Sir John Stewart,—being supposed, along 
with his twin-brother Sholto, who died an infant, to have been born in 
Paris,—when their mother, after having long been married and re- 
mained childless, was in her forty-ninth year ;—and, if such was his 
birth, he had a right to the immense estates of his maternal grandfather 
the late Duke of Douglas, and was the heir general of the Douglas 
family, one of the most illustrious in Europe. ‘The Duke of Hamilton, 
the heir male of the Douglas’s, and in default of issue of the Lady 
Jane, entitled to all their domains, as well as those of the Hamiltons, 
which he inherited through a female, insisted that these two children 
were spurious, and had been purchased from a glass manufacturer and 
a rope-dancer at Paris,—brought an action in the Court of Session in 
Scoiland, to establish his right,—and there had a majority of the Judges 
in his favour.* The appeal was heard in the session of 1769, and 
drew vast crowds to the bar of the House of Lords to listen to the 
weighty and eloquent argumentation of Thurlow, Wedderburn, and the 
other most eminent advocates of the age. It was conjectured that the 
law Lords were for the appellant, but the great body of the Peers had 
attended the hearing of the appeal, and were to take part in the deci- 
sion; there had been much canvassing for the ‘* Douglases” and the 
*“« Hamiltons,” and a great degree of suspense existed down to the very 
morning of the judgment. 

It astonishes us very much to be told, that when the order of the day 
had been read by the Clerk, for the further consideration -y_ 
of the cause of the Duke of Hamilion vy. Douglas, the LiF poor 69] 
Duke of Newcastle spoke first, and that ‘* he was answered by Lord 
Sandwich, who spoke for three hours with much humour, and scandalised 
the Bishops, having, with his usual industry, studied even the midwifery 
of the case, which he retailed with very little decency.” T 

Lord Camden then thus began,—there being such silence while he 
spoke, that a handkerchief would have been heard to drop, notwithstand- 
ing the crowds in attendance:t ‘ My Lords, the cause before us is, 
perhaps, the most solemn and important ever heard at this bar. For 
my own share, | am unconnected with the parties ; and having with all 
possible attention considered the matter, both in public and private, I 
shall give my opinion with that strictness of impartiality to which your 
Lordships have so just and equitable claim. We have one short ques- 
tion before us,—Is the appellant the son of the late Lady Jane Douglas, 
or not? [am of the mind that he is; and ownthat a more ample and 
positive proof of the child’s being the son of a mother never appeared 
in a court of justice, or before any assize whatever.” After very ably 
stating the prima facie case from the marriage of the parents, and their 
acknowledging the appellant as their son, he minutely analysed the 
evidence to contradict and to corroborate it and thus (vondeau fashion) 

* The fifteen Judges of the Court of Session divided 8 to 7—the Lord President 
Dundas being in the majority. 

+ Horace Walpole’s “ Memoirs of George III.,” vol. iii. 303. 

t “Lord Mansfield, it had long been discovered, favoured the Dougloses; but 


the Chancellor Camden, with dignity and deeency, had concealed his opiniou to the 
very day of the decision.’—Horace Walpole’s Memoirs of George II. vol. iii. 303, 


236 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


concluded,—* The question before us is short, ‘Is the appellant the son 
of Lady Jane Douglas, or not?’ If there be any Lords within these walls 
who do not believe in a future state, these may go to death with the de- 
claration that they believe he is not. For my part, I am for sustaining 
the positive proof, which I find weakened by nothing brought against it « 
and, in this mind, I lay my hand upon my breast, and declare that, in 
my soul and conscience, I believe the appellant to be her son.”* 

Lord Mansfield followed—haud passibus @quis—making the worst 
speech he ever delivered—so bad a speech as to bring suspicion upon 
the judgment—for he did little more than dwell upon the illustrious 
descent of the Lady Jane, and the impossibility of any one with such a 
pedigree being guilty of such a fraud as palming a supposititious child 
upon the world.t The House agreed to the reversal without a division, 
but five lay Peers signed a protest recording their opinion that “ the 
appellant was proved not to be the son of Lady Jane Douglas.” 

Before finally quitting Lord Camden’s Chancellorship, | must advert 
to the manner in which he disposed of his judicial patronage—always 
an important consideration in scanning the merits or demerits of Chan- 
cellors ; and I am happy to say, that instead of corrupting or enfeebling 
the bench by political job, or personal favour, he acted steadily for the 
public good, on the maxim, Detur digniort. When about to leave the 
Common Pleas, he succeeded in having the learned and virtuous Sir 
Eardley Wilmot appointed to succeed him—whom he thus addressed : 


* See George Hardinge’s striking account of this speech, Appendix, post. 

t It is hardly possible that the account we have of Lord Mansfield’s speech on 
this occasion can be full and correct, particularly as it does not contain the charges 
against Andrew Stewart, which were made the subject of the famous “ Letters.” 

t Horace Walpole thus states the result: —“ The Chancellor then rose, and with 
leading authority and infinite applause told the Lords that he must now declare that 
he thought the whole plea of the Hamiltons a tissue of perjury woven by Mr. 
Andrew Stewart, and that, were he sitting as judge in any other Court, he would 
order the jury to find for Mr. Douglas; and that, what that jury ought to do on 
their oaths, their Lordships ought to do on their honours. This speech, in which it 
was allowed he outshone Lord Mansfield, had the most decisive effect. The latter, 
with still more personal severity to Stewart, spoke till he fainted with the heat and 
fatigue. At ten at night the decree was reversed without a division.”—Memoirs of 
George ITI, vol. iii. 304, 

I believe the general opinion of English lawyers was in favour of the decision of 
the Court of Session in Scotland; but this was produced a good deal by Lord Mans. 
field’s wretched argument, and the very able letters of Andrew Stewart, the Duke 
of Hamilton’s agent, whose conduct had been severely reflected upon. I once 
studied the case very attentively, and I must own that I came to the conclusion that 
the House of Lords did well in reversing. There was undoubtedly false evidence 
in support of the appellant; but it would have been too much in such a case to act 
upon the maxim, “ false in one thing, false in all things,” so as to deprive him of 
his birthright from misconduct to which he was not privy. There seems to be no 
doubt that the Lady Jane, notwithstanding her advanced age, subsequently to the 
birth of the appellant, was pregnant, and had a miscarriage: and insuperable diffi- 
culties attended the theory of his being the son of Madame Mignon. Being in pos- 
session of his status, I think the evidence was insufficient to deprive him of it—and 
the strong family likeness satisfactorily established seems to prove that the conclu- 
sion of law concurred with the fact of his physical origin. 


LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN. 237 


“5th August, 1766. 

* | have the King’s orders to acquaint you with his intention of re- 
moving you to the Chief Justiceship of the Common Pleas, if it be 
agreeable to you. As Mr. Morton is not yet determined to yield up to 
you the Chief Justiceship of Chester, | would advise you to repose your- 
selfin the Common Fleas till that desired event happens. J assure you 
at ws a place of perfect tranquillity. 1 do most sincerely congratulate 
you on this nomination, and beg leave to inform you that you owe as 
much to Lord Northington and to Lord Chatham as to myself. I have 
been under a treaty with George Cooke ever since | came to town, the 
particulars of which you shall know when you come. I have with- 
stood his bribe, being determined never to defraud my successor upon 
my deathbed: his necessities are extreme as well as my punctilio: 
However, it is now in your hands rather in mine ;* for I do not con- 
sider myself any longer in conscience, though [ am in law, Chief Jus- 
tice of the Common Pleas. 

* T am with great truth, &c. 
“* CAMDEN.” 


The times were too distracted to allow of any systematic amendment 
of the law ; but it should be recorded that, under the auspices of Lord 
Chancellor Camden, passed the “* Nullum Tempus Act,” by which an 
adverse enjoyment of property for sixty years gave a good title against 
the Crown, whereas the maxim had before prevailed, ‘* zd/um_ tempus 
occurrit Regt,—according to which obsolete claims might be set up, 
and vexatious proceedings instituted by the government against poli- 
tical opponents.t 

About the same time likewise passed the famous ‘“ Grenville Act,” 
by which the decision of contested elections was transferred from the 
House of Commons as a body, to select Committees sworn to do jus- 
tice between the parties.[ The chief merit of the measure belongs to 
its author whose name it bears, but from his colleague at the head of 
the law he had encouragement and assistance in preparing it. 

Thus Lord Camden, while in office, must be allowed to have de- 
served well of his country. He rendered her still more important ser- 
vices when reduced to a private station. 





CHAPTER CXLV. 


CONTINUATION OF THE LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN TILL HE WAS FIRST 
APPOINTED PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL. 


Passtne over for the present the intrigues for the disposal of the 
Great Seal, which accompanied and followed Lord Camden’s resigna- 


* This relates to an office in the Court which then, and long after, the Chief 
Justice might lawfully sell. 
+ Stat. 9 Geo. 3, c. 16. t 10 Geo. 3, c. 16. 


238 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


tion of it, we must now regard him as an opposition leader, banded 
with Lord Chatham, Lord Rockingham and other Whig peers, strenu- 
ously to resist the measures of the new government with Lord North 
at the head of it. At the commencement of their operations he was 
placed rather in an awkward predicament in a debate which arose on 
Lord Marchmont’s famous midnight motion,* * that any interference of 
the Lords respecting the Middlesex election would be unconstitutional.” 
‘Lord Chatham having bitterly reflected on the measures of the govern- 
ment respecting Wilkes, Lord Sandwich took occasion to charge the late 
Chancellor with duplicity of conduct, because he had permitted those pro- 
ceedings which had given so much disgust, and which he and his friends 
now so loudly condemned. Lord Camden answered him, by de- 
claring upon his honour, ‘ that long before Mr. Wilkes’s expulsion, and 
also before the vote of incapacity, on being asked his opinion by the 
Duke of Grafton, he had pronounced it both illegal and imprudent,”— 
adding that “he had always thought so, and had often delivered his 
opinion to that effect.”+ The Duke of Grafton, however, declared that 
although the Chancellor had once before the expulsion said it would 
be impolitic or ill-timed, he never had expressed his sentiments on 
the vote of incapacity, but whenever that subject was agitated he had 
withdrawn from the council board, thereby declining to give any 
opinion upon it; and Lord Weymouth, another member of the Cabinet, 
asserted that the Chancellor had withheld his advice and assistance 
from his colleagues on every mention of expulsion and incapacity.— 
Lord Camden, “ Before the silence to which the noble Lords allude, 
I had repeatedly given my opinion upon the impropriety of the measures 
we have been discussing. But when I found that my opinion and my 
advice were rejected and despised, and that these measures were to be 
pursued in spite of every remonstrance I could make,I did withdraw 
myself—under the conviction that my presence would only distract, 
without preventing them. I was never farther consulted upon them 
directly or indirectly, because my opinion was well known—but I was 
ever ready to express my opinion boldly and openly on every question 
debated in Council, and humbly, but firmly to give my best advice to 
my Sovereign for the public good.” 

When Lord Chatham introduced his bill for reversing the decision of 
the House of Commons, which disqualified’Mr. Wilkes, and seated Mr. 
Lutterell as member for Middlesex, Lord Camden warmly supported it 
against the vigorous attacks of Lord Mansfield. After stating the 
course pursued, he thus proceeded : ‘* What, then, hindered the House 
from receiving Mr. Wilkes as their member? I am ashamed to guess 
at itj—merely because they would act in an arbitrary, dictatorial 
manner, in spite of law or precedent, against reason and justice. A 
secret influence had said the word—* Mr. Wilkes shall not sit,’ and the 


* It was on this occasion that Lord Chatham exclaimed, “If the constitution 
must be wounded, let it not receive its mortal stab at this dark and midnight hour.” 

+ As far as the original expulsion goes, Lord Camden had forgotten his first 
opinion, Ante, p. 225, t 16 Parl. Hist. 824. 


LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN. 239 


fiat was to be obeyed, though it tore out the heart-strings of this excel- 
lent constitution. The judgment passed upon the Middlesex election is 
a more tyrannical act than any which disgraced the twelve years’ sus- 
pension of Parliaments in the reign of Charles I. ; and, though this bill 
may be rejected (as we are all sensible how a majority can supersede 
reason and argument), [ trust in the good sense and spirit of the people 
of this country—that they will renew the claim of their inherent and 
inalienable right to a true and free representation in Parliament.”* 
Soon after arose the personal controversy between Lord Camden and 
Lord Mansfield, respecting the law of libel. A motion having been 
made in the House of Commons, respecting the direction given to the 
jury on the trial of Woodfall, for publishing Junrus’s “ Letter to the 
King,” Lord Mansfield desired that the House of Lords might be sum- 
moned, as ‘‘ he had something to communicate to their Lordships.” On 
the day appointed, he contented himself with saying, that he had left a 
paper with the Clerk of the House ; that the paper contained the opinion 
of the Court of King’s Bench in the case of Rez v. 
WOvA UI ant that weir Lbtdahide might: regd its Loe F018 TOO 
and take copies of it if they pleased. Lord Camden asked him if he 
meant to have the paper entered on the Journals. He said, ** No! no! 
only to leave it with the Clerk.”—Lord Camden. ** My Lords, | con- 
sider the paper delivered in by the noble Lord on the woolsackt as a 
challenge directed personally to me, and [ accept it ; he has thrown down 
the glove, and [ take it up. In direct contradiction to him, | maintain 
that his doctrine is not the law of England. I am ready to enter into 
the debate whenever the noble Lord will fix a day for it. I desire and 
insist that it may be an early one. Meanwhile, I propose the following 
questions to the noble and learned Lord upon his paper, to each of 
which I expect an answer.” He then read six questions respecting the 
Chief Justice’s notions as to the jury being at liberty to consider whether 
the paper, charged to be libellous, be of a criminal or innoceut cha- 
racter. Lord Mansfield replied that ‘this mode of proceeding was 
taking him by surprise; that it was unfair; and that he would not 
answer interrogatories.” Lord Camden then pressed fora day to be 
appointed for the noble and learned Lord to give in his answers, and 
said he was ready to meet him at any time. Lord Mansfield pledged 
himself, that the matter should be discussed. ‘The Duke of Richmond, 


* 16 Parl. Hist. 963, 1306. No other discussion respecting Lord Camden’s con- 
duct while Chancellor, or his dismission, appears in the printed parliamentary 
debates. But the Duke of Grafton, in his Journal, says: “ At this time Lord Chat- 
ham’s virulence seemed to be directed against myself: he persisted for some days 
in the intention of charging me in Parliament with having advised the removal of 
Lord Camden, on account of his vote in the House; nor was he dissuaded from this 
till Lord Camden had assured him that he knew so perfectly that the advice did not 
come from me, that he should, if his Lordship made the motion, think it incambent 
on him to rise in his place and declare that he well knew it was not from my 
advice.” 


+ T'he Seals were now in commission, and Lord Mansfield presided as Speaker in 
the House of Lords. 


240 REIGN OF GEORGE IIL. 


having congratulated the House on the prospect before them, begged 
that the day might be fixed.—Lord Mansfield. 1 have only said I 
will hereafter give my opinion ; and as to fixing a day, I will not fix a 
day.” The matter here dropped, and never was resumed, Lord Mans- 
field’s want of moral courage holding him back from a renewal of the 
contest, and Lord Camden thinking that he had gained a sufficient 
triumph.* 

The morning after this encounter, he received the following kind and 
flattering inquiry from Lord Chatham :— 


“ Pall Mall, Wednesday. 
‘¢ My dear Lord, 

*“T am anxious to know how you do after the noble exertion of 
yesterday. What your Lordship did was transcendent, and as you 
were not quite well [ am solicitous to hear of you ;—thouvh, after re- 
collection, I think [ ought to inquire how my Lord Mansfield does,’’t 


The Ex-chancellor continued most zealously to discharge his public 
duty, and was indefatigable in his attendance in the House of Lords, 
and in hearing causes in the Privy Council, when summoned to attend 
there ; but till the rupture with the American colonies was approach- 
ing, he seems from this time seldom to have taken a prominent part in 
the debates, 

When the Royal Marriage Act was brought forward in 1772, he 
strongly opposed it. He admitted that some regulations were neces- 
sary to prevent the misalliance of those near to the throne; but he dis- 
approved of the proposed enactments, and he strongly pointed out the 
inconvenience and injustice which might arise from the proposal to ex- 
tend them to all the descendants of George IL, who, according to 
the common process of descent, might be expected in a few genera- 
tions to extend to many thousands, He mentioned that he knew 
an undoubted legitimate descendant of a King of England who was 
then keeping an alehouse.—His manliness deserves great credit, con- 
sidering that the reigning Sovereign was resolved to carry the bill as 
originally framed, avainst the advice of several of his Ministers,—and 
had expressed himself personally offended with all who questioned its 
wisdom. 

In 1774, came on judicially in the House of Lords the great question 
of literary property,—‘* whether, at common law, authors have a_per- 
petual copyright io their works?” Lord Camden denied the claim; 
and, on his opinion, the judgment was pronounced, by which only a 
limited monopoly is enjoyed, as conferred by the legislature. I give a 
specimen of his speech, which has been loudly praised, but which I 
must own appears to me, though founded on right principle, to be 
rather declamatory : “If there be anything in ‘the world common to 
all mankind, science and literature are in their nature pud/icz juris, and 
they ought to be free and general as air or water. ‘They forget their 


* 16 St, Tr. 1317, 1321. + MSS. of the present Marquis Camden. 


LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN. 241 


Creator as well as their fellow-creatures, who wish to monopolize his 
noblest gifts and greatest benefits. Why did we enter into society at 
all, but to enlighten one another’s minds, and improve our faculties for 
the common welfare of the species? ‘Those great men, those favoured 
mortals, those sublime spirits, who share that ray of divinity which we 
call genius, are entrusted by Providence with the delegated power of 
imparting to their fellow-creatures that instruction which Heaven 
meant for universal benefit: they must not be niggards to the world, or 
hoard up for themselves the common stock. We know what was the 
punishment of him who hid his talent; and Providence has taken care 
that there shall not be wanting the noblest motives and incentives for 
men of genius to communicate to the world the truths and discoveries, 
which are nothing if uncommunicated. Knowledge has no value or 
use for the solitary owner; to be enjoyed, it must be communicated : 
scive tuum nihilest, nist te scire hoc sciat alter, Glory is the reward 
of science ; and those who deserve it scorn all meaner views. I speak 
not of the scribblers for bread, who tease the world with their wretched 
productions ; fourteen years is too long a period for their perishable 
trash. It was not for gain that Bacon, Newton, Milton, Locke, in- 
structed and delighted the world. When the bookseller offered Milton 
five pounds for his Parapise Lost, he did not reject the offer and com- 
mit his piece to the flames, nor did he accept the miserable pittance as 
the reward of his labours ; he knew that the real price of his work was 
immortality, and that posterity would pay it. Some authors are as 
careless of profit as others are rapacious of it, and in what a situation 
would the public be with regard to literature if there were no means of 
compelling a second impression of a useful work? All our learning 
would be locked up in the hands of the Tonsons and Lintots of the 
age, who could set what price upon it their avarice chooses to demand, 
till the whole public became as much their slaves as their own wretched 
hackney compilers.”*—He afterwards opposed the bill introduced to 
extend the period of copyright,t and it was thrown out. But [ think 
he was romantically unjust to literary men, and the controversy is at 
last well settled by the exertions of my friend Serjeant Talfourd{— 
so that literature may now be pursued as a liberal profession, offering 
to those who succeed in it the means of honourable support, and of 
making an adequate provision for their families. 

After the time when Lord Camden was removed from the office of 
Chancellor till the Duke of Grafton quitted office and joined the oppo- 
sition in 1776, they were political enemies, but they continued private 
friends. I will here introduce a few extracts from the letters of the 
former, showing the familiar intimacy which subsisted between them. 

The Ex-premier having accepted the office of Lord Privy Seal under 
Lord North, the Ex-chancellor sent him a letter [June 19, 1771.] 
of congratulation, in which he says: “If I was 
not more afraid of public calumny than of any private or particular 

* 17 Parl. Hist. 992, Donaldson v. Becket. t Ib, 1402, 

t Stat. 5 & 6 Vic. c. 45. 

VOL. V. 16 


242 REIGN OF GEORGE IItl 


displeasure, I should certainly, as I intended, pay my respects to 
your Grace next week, which your Grace must now excuse me 
from doing, because that would look more like courting your 
fortune than seeking your friendship. Notwithstanding which I 
shall still hold myself engaged, if you please, to spend a day with your 
Grace at Wakefield Lodge some time in the summer. And when every 
body sees, as they will in a month or two, that Iam neither partaking 
your good fortune, nor paying homage to it in the moment of your 
preferment, I shall set at nought every other suspicion that jealousy and 
malversation may raise against my conduct.” 
To an invitation from the Duke to visit him, Lord Camden returned 
? the following answer: ‘“‘ Your Grace is too great a 
Khitan tite man to feel a comfort of so private a pati as | 
am enjoying, and of not being under the daily temptation of a plentiful 
table, when the digestion always suffers in proportion as the appetite is 
provoked. [am advancing apace towards the state of a steady and in- 
vincible abstinence, and begin to think I may be able to withstand all the 
allurements both of meat and drink. Butl am sure to be in danger the 
moment I set my foot in Wakefield Lodge. If I should find myself suffi- 
ciently fortified to meet and resist this temptation by the month of Au- 
gust, | shall endeavour to take advantage of your Grace’s invitation, 
for I should be extremely happy to keep alive that friendship which 
had commenced in politics, and has never been violated, though un- 
luckily interrupted, by the same cause.” 
The next letter in the series is without date, but must have been writ- 
[a.D. 1776.] ten soon alter :—‘* Mine and your Grace’s old friend, 

singe ‘4 the Earl of Chatham, still continues extremely ill. J am 
satisfied from the account I hear from time to time (for he sees nobody), 
he can never recover his health so far as to be fit for any active busi- 
ness,—so miserably is he reduced by age and sickness. I am, thank 
God, remarkably well, but your Grace must not seduce me into my 
former intemperance. A plain dish and a draught of porter (which last 
is indispensable) are the very extent of my luxury. I have suffered a 
good deal, and have studied stomach disorders to such purpose, that I 
think I am able to teach your Grace (who are yet young) how to arrive 
at a strong and healthy old age,—which, I hope, will be your lot for the 
sake of the public as well as of your friends,” 

When the Duke of Grafton, seeing the injustice of the American war, 
and alarmed by the unskilful manner in which it was carried on, joined 
Lord ‘Chatham, Lord Rockingham, and Lord Shelburne, in trying to 
put an end to it, Lord Camden again wrote to him, with the most un- 
bounded confidence on all subjects. The following is the desponding 
view taken by the Ex-chancellor of public affairs in the beginning of 
the year 1776 :—* I am so satisfied of the efficacy of Bath for my con- 

(Jan. 4, 1776.] tity on Aton I am determined to make it another visit 

next spring; nor shall any consideration of politics 
restrain me; for, indeed, my dear Lord, the chances of doing good is 
at an end. Sc many circumstances have combined, like so many fatali- 


LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN. 243 


ties, to overturn this mighty empire, that all attempts to support it are 
weak and ineffectual. Who could have imagined that the ministry could 
have become popular by forcing this country into a. destructive war, 
and advancing the power of the crown to a state of despotism? And 
yet that is the fact, and we, the minority, suffer under the odium due 
only to the ministers, without the consolation either of pay or power. 
America is lost, and the war afoot, ‘There is an end of advising pre- 
ventive measures, and peace will be more difficult to make than war 
was. For your Grace justly observes that the claims of the Americans, 
if they are successful, will grow too big for concession, and no man 
here will venture to be responsible for such a treaty. For I am per- 
suaded it will be the fate of England to stoop, though I do not know the 
minister to apply so humiliating a remedy. Shall we ever condescend 
to make that country a satisfaction for damages ? and yet she will never 
treat without it. What, then, must be our conduct in Parliament? [ 
am ata loss to advise. I thought from the beginning of the year seces- 
sion was the only measure left. I still think the same: but I will enter 
the lists of a more active opposition if that shall be thought best. I 
wish it were possible for the whole body to unite ; but union is only un- 
derstood and practised on the other side of the Atlantic. That would 
be respectable, and perhaps formidable; but [ do not expect to see it. 
Absence would, look more like union to the public, and might, perhaps, 
join us at last into a confederacy.* If motions are to be made, they 
should be in concert, and we ought to protect and defend each other 
from attacks, like real friends: else, like other broken forces, we shall 
be put to the rout.” 

A few days after, Lord Camden added :—* I shall persist to the last 
in giving my testimony against nis pernicious met (iin. 7 1776.] 
though [ neither expect success nor popular applause, 
but it will be no inconsiderable consolation to hear my name joined 
to your Grace’s, let the event turn out as it may.” 

In the autumn of this year Lord Camden visited Ireland, where he 
had a daughter married to Mr. Stewart, the ancestor of the present 
Marquis of Londonderry. ‘Fhence he thus addressed the Duke of 
Grafton : “ The colonies have now declared their independence. Tnry 
ARE Enemies 1N War AnD FRIENDS IN PEace; and the two coun- 
tries are fairly rent asunder.- What then are we?—mere friends or 
enemies to America. Friends to their rights and privileges as fellow- 
subjects, but not friends to their independence. This event does not sur- 
prise me: I foresaw it. The Ministers drove it on with a view of con- 
verting a tyrannical and oppressive invasion intu a national and neces- 
sary war; and they have succeeded too well: and now I expect the op- 
position will be called upon to join with them in one cause, and we 
shall be summoned as Englishmen to. unanimity. But if your Grace 
should see a French war to grow out of this civil dispute, which I ex- 
pect and believe to be unavoidable, our provinces will then be leagued 


* It is surprising to find this great constitutional lawyer recommending secession 
from Parliament—a measure wrong in principle, and which has invariably been in. 


jurious to the party resorting to it. 


244 REIGN OF GEORGE IIL 


with our enemies in an offensive war against Great Britain. In such a 
situation a private man may retire, and lament the calamities which he 
endeavoured faithfully to prevent. But how can he give an active op- 
position to measures that selfspreservation will then stamp with necessity ? 
I have but one line to pursue if I am to bear my part, and that is a re- 
union with America, almost at any rate. ‘ Se possis, rvecte: St non, 
quocunque modo.’ But I do not expect the ministry, the Parliament, or 
the nation, will adopt any such system. So that what with the general 
fear in some of incurring the popular odium, and in others of seizing 
this opportunity ‘ to make their fortunes by shifting thetr position, ac- 
cording to Lord Suffolk’s phrase,—the minority next winter will dwindle 
to nothing.” 

In the beginning of 1777, he writes: ‘ From polities, my dear Lord, 

(Jan. 7) 1777] Iam ak Agmiien weaned. | cannot prevail upon 
myself to go with the tide, and I have no power to 
struggle against it. War must now decide the question between the two 
countries, both sides having too much offended to be ever forgiven. But 
hopeless as am, I shall be always at your Grace’s command, and 
ready to contribute my poor endeavours for the public. And yet I sus- 
pect [ shall spend more time this year at the play-house and opera than 
the House of Lords.” 

Notwithstanding Lord Camden’s despair, arising from the violent 
councils adopted by the government, and the passion for coercing the 
colonists which still prevailed in the nation, he nobly seconded Lord 
Chatham in all the efforts of that illustrious patriot to bring about a 
reconciliation between the mother country and the colonies. He spoke 
at great length in every debate upon America, and many of his speeches 
during this interval are preserved. But although they were most ex- 
citing when delivered, the interest of them has nearly died away, and [ 
can only venture to give a few extracts from them to show their extra- 
ordinary merit. 2 

In opposing the bill for cutting off commerce with the New England 
States which so soon led to hostilities, he said, ‘‘ Some of your Lord- 
ships inform us that it is a bill of mercy and clemency,—kind and in- 
dulgent to the Americans,—calculated to soothe their feelings, and to 
favour their interests. But, my Lords, the true character of the bill is 
violent and hostile. My Lords, it is a bill of irritation and insult. It 
draws the sword, and in its necessary consequences plunges the empire 
into civil and unnatural war.”* 

On the Duke of Grafton’s motion respecting the British forces in 

[Nov. 15, 1777.] pene he said, ‘¢] was epminst this unnatural iid 
rom the beginning. I was against every measure 

that has reduced us to our present state of difficulty and distress. When 
it is insisted that we aim only to defend and enforce our own rights, | 
positively deny it. I contend that America has been driven by cruel 
necessity to defend her rights from the united attacks of violence, op- 
pression, and injustice. | affirm that America has been aggrieved. 


* 18 Parl. Hist. 436. 


LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN. 245 


Perhaps, as a domineering Englishman wishing to enjoy the ideal bene- 
fit of such a claim, I might urge it with earnestness and endeavour to 
carry my point ; but if, on the other hand, I resided in America—that I 
were to feel the effect of such manifest wrong, I should resist the attempt 
with that degree of ardour so daring a violation of what should be held 
dearer than life itself ought to enkindle in the breast of every free- 
man.”* Speakinga second time in this same debate, after he had been 
loudly reproached for the violence of his language, he said: “ Till I am 
fairly precluded from exercising my right as a Peer of this House, of 
declaring my sentiments openly, of discussing every subject submitted 
to my consideration with freedom, I shall never be prevented from per- 
forming my duty by any threats, however warmly and eagerly supported 
_or secretly suggested. | do assure your Lordships I am heartily tired 
of the ineffectual struggle | am engaged in. | would thank any of your 
Lordships that would procure a vote of your Lordships for silencing me ; 
it would be a favour more grateful than any other it is in the power of 
your Lordships to bestow ; but until that vote has received your Lord- 
ships’ sanction, I must still think, and, as often as occasion may require, 
continue to assert that Great Britain was the aggressor, that our acts 
with respect to America were oppressive, and that if I were an Ameri- 
can | should resist to the last such manifest exertions of tyranny, vio- 
lence, and injustice.” + 

Lord Camden, in his correspondence with the Duke of Grafton, 
afterwards gives an account of a serious illness of Lord Chatham which 
was kept secret from the world, and seems to have been a prelude to 
the closing scene of his glorious career. In a P.S. to a letter, dated 
July 27, 1777, he says, “ Since I wrote this | have received a melan- 
choly account of a stroke received to-day by Lord Chatham, as he was 
riding. He fell from his horse, and lay senseless for ten minutes, 
The message to-night is, that he is very much recovered. Whe- 
ther this was apoplectic, paralytic, or gout in the stomach, I cannot 
learn. J wish it may not prove fatal. The public has lost him, and [| 
fear he and England will perish together.” 

In a few weeks after he gives this statement of Lord Chatham’s 
recovery and of his plans: ‘I thought it better to 
wait till I could give you some satisfactory account AoE sie ag Lede) 
of my neighbour, Lord Chatham’s health, and his intentions at the 
opening of Parliament. If your Grace thinks asI do that the Earl’s 
recovery may, upon some possible event, give a new turn to public 
affairs, you will not be sorry to hear that he is now (though it seems 
almost miraculous), in bodily health, and in mental vigour, as equal to 
a strenuous exertion of his faculties as I have known him these seven 
years. His intention is to oppose the address, and declare his opinion 
very directly against the war, and to advise the recalling the troops, 
and then propose terms of accommodation wherein he would be very 


* 18 St. Tr. 947. 

+ 1b. 954. See also 18 Parl. Hist. 36, 164, 209, 271, 292, 422, 436, 454, 656, 
675, 811, 901, 953, 1222, 1278, 1284; vol. xix. 337, 394, 625, 640, 652, 664, 738, 
60. 


246 REIGN OF GEORGE IIf. 


liberal and indulgent, with only one reserve and exception, viz. that of 
subjection to the mother country: for he never could bring himself to 
subscribe to the independence of America. This, in general, will be 
his line, and this he will pursue if he is alone. I should imagine your 
Grace would have no objection to concur with this plan, though it is 
certain beforehand that all the breath will be wasted, and the advice 
overruled by numbers. Yet it would be right to stand firm upon the 
same ground, and not depart an inch from our steady purpose of 
opposing this war for ever. Thus much I thought it my duty to impart 
to your Grace. For my own part, I still continue in the same state of 
despondency, hoping nothing and fearing everything.” 

On the memorable 7th of April, 1778, when Lord Chatham fell 
senseless on the floor of the House of Lords in a dying effort to save 
his country, Lord Camden who was prepared to follow him in the de- - 
bate, immediately ran to his relief and joined in the vote of adjourn- 
ment to which the House immediately came. A few days after, in a 
letter to the Duke of Grafton, he wrote the following account—the 
most graphic and the most authentic extant—of that solemn scene: 


“ April, 1778, N. B. Street. 
“« My dear Lord, 

*¢T cannot help considering the little illness which prevented your 
Grace from attending the House of Lords last Tuesday to have been a 
piece of good fortune, as it kept you back from a scene that would have 
overwhelmed you with grief and melancholy, as it did me and many 
others that were present: I mean Lord Chatham’s fit, that seized him 
as he was attempting to rise and reply to the Duke of Richmond ; he 
fell back upon his seat, and was to all appearance in the agonies of 
death. -This threw the whole House into confusion ; every person was 
upon his legs in a moment, hurrying from one place to another, some 
sending for assistance, others producing salts, and others reviving 
spirits. Many crowding about the Earl to observe his countenance— 
all affected—most part really concerned; and even those who might 
have felt a secret pleasure at the accident, yet put on the appearance of 
distress, except only the Earl of M.,* who sat still, almost as much un- 
moved as the senseless body itself. Dr. Brocklesby was the first 
physician that came; but Dr. Addington in about an hour was 
brought to him. He was carried into the Prince’s chamber, and laid 
upon .the table supported by pillows. The first motion of life that 
appeared was an endeavour to vomit, and after he had discharged the 
load from his stomach that probably brought on the seizure, he revived 
fast. Mr. Strutt prepared an apartment for him at his house, where he 
was carried as soon as he could with safety be removed. He slept re- 
markably well, and was quite recovered yesterday, though he continued 
in bed. I have not heard how he is to-day, but will keep my letter 

* It appears by the Journals that there were only two Earls bearing titles begin- 


ning with an M, present that day—the Earl of Marchmont and the Earl of Mans. 
field. Jam much afraid that the latter is alluded to. 


LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN, 247 


open till the evening, that your Grace may be informed how he goes 
on. I saw him in the Prince’s chamber before he went into the House, 
and conversed a little with him, but such was the feeble state of his 
body, and indeed the distempered agitation of his mind, that I did 
forebode that his strength would certainly fail him before he had 
finished his speech. In truth, he was not in a condition to go 
abroad, and he was earnestly requested not to make the attempt ; 
but your Grace knows how obstinate he is when he is resolved. He 
had a similar fit to this in the summer ; like it in all respects, in the 
seizure, the retching, and the recovery ; and after that fit, as if it had 
been the crisis of the disorder, he recovered fast, and grew to be in 
better health than [ had known him for many years. Pray heaven that 
this may be attended with no worse consequences. The Earl spoke, 
but was not like himself; his speech faltered, his sentences broken, 
and his mind not master of itself. He made shift, with difficulty, to 
declare his opinion, but was not able to enforce it by argument. His 
words were shreds of unconnected eloquence, and flashes of the same 
fire which he, Prometheus-like, had stolen.from heaven, and were then 
returning to the place from whence they were taken. Your Grace sees 
even I, who am a mere prose man, am tempted to be poetical while I 
am discoursing of this extraordinary man’s genius, The Duke of 
Richmond answered him, and [ cannot help giving his Grace the com- 
mendation he deserves for his candour, courtesy, and liberal treatment 
of his illustrious adversary. The,debate was adjourned till yesterday, 
and then the former subject was taken up by Lord Shelburne, in a 
speech of one hour and three quarters. ‘The Duke of Richmond an- 
swered ; Shelburne replied ; and the Duke, who enjoys the privilege 
of the last word in that House, closed the business, no other Lord, 
except our friend Lord Ravensworth, speaking one word ; the two other 
noble Lords consumed between three and four hours. And now, my 
dear Lord, you must with me lament this fatal accident; I fear it is 
fatal, and this great man is now lost for ever to his country ; for after 
such a public and notorious exposure of his decline, no man will look up 
to him, even if he should recover. France will no longer fear him, nor 
the King of England court him; and the present set of ministers will 
finish the ruin of the state, because, he being i in effect superannuated, 
the public will call for no other men. This is a very melancholy re- 
flection. ‘The opposition, however, is not broken, and this difference 
of opinion will wear off; so far at least, the prospect is favourable.  [ 
think I shall not sign the protest, though, in other respects, I shall be 
very friendly. I have troubled your Grace with a deal of stuff, but 
the importance of the subject will excuse me. 
“ Your Grace’s, &c. 
“ CAMDEN. 

«PS. T understand the Earl has slept well last night, and is to be 
removed to-day to Downing Street. He would have gone into the 
country, but Addington thinks he is too weak.” 


On the day when the debate was resumed, Lord Camden was silent ; 


ay 


248 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


and it was remarked, that thenceforth during the rest of the struggle 
with America, being deprived of his great associate,—from grief, or 
despair of doing good, he hardly ever addressed the House. 

However, when the Biil to mark the gratitude of the nation for the 
immortal services of Lord Chatham was opposed by the Lord Chan- 
cellor Apsley, although the King professed to approve of it, Lord Cam- 
den’s indignation burst forth, and he exclaimed, ‘¢ The noble and learned 
Lord on the woolsack has praised very deservedly—I hope with no in- 
sidious intention—the memory of the Duke of Marlborough—but seems 
entirely to have forgotten the victories of the deceased Earl. | will 
remind the noble and learned Lord that while he, who it is now wished 
to treat with neglect, as 2f by some accident alone he had been elevated 
to an office he was incompetent to fill, ruled the destinies of this mighty 
empire, from the extremest east to the setting sun—in every quarter of 
the globe—to earth’s remotest bounds—were the arms of England 
borne triumphant ;—our operations on the sea and on the land were 
invariably accompanied by extension of territory and extension of com- 
merce, and we had at once all the glories of war and all the enjoyments 
of peace. But, my Lords, what I consider a more substantial claim to 
your admiration and your gratitude, he was ever the assertor of liberty 
and the defender of the rights of Englishmen at home and abroad, 
Had his advice been followed, the country would now have been free, 
tranquil, and happy ; and it is only by returning to his principles that 
we can be rescued from the state of degradation and suffering to which, 
by despising them, we have been reduced.”* It is not very creditable 
to the House that, at the division, the attendance of Peers was so 
small ;—perhaps the dinner hour had arrived ;—but the Bill was car- 
ried by a majority of 42 to 11. 

Lord Camden warmly supported Lord Rockingham’s motion for a 
censure on the manifesto of our Commissioners in America which put 
the country under martial law—when he took occasion to reprobate 
the cruel manner in which hostilities were conducted, and still more the 
arrogant tone in which this cruelty was defended: ‘*‘ Were not toma- 
hawks and scalping-knifes considered the proper instruments of war ? 
Was not letting loose savages to scalp and murder the aged and the 
impotent, called using the instruments of war which God and nature 
have put into our hands.” Then, in the spirit of his departed friend, 
he counselled that, instead of trying to lay waste America, we should 
immediately strike a blow against France, evidently preparing to take 
part against us, ‘“ Distress France,” said he; ‘ render her incapable 
of assisting America. Attack France immediately ; attack her power- 
fully by sea. England is still mistress of the ocean. To wound 
America is to wound ourselves. To aim a blow at France, is to pre- 
vent a blow from being aimed at us by an inveterate enemy.” The 
motion being negatived by 71 to 37, he drew up a spirited protest which 
was signed by almost all the Whig Peers.t 


* 19 Parl. Hist. 1239. + 2 Parl. Hist. 43. 


LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN. 249 


When the indecisive engagement off Ushant took place in the sum- 
Bie of 1778, Lord Camden in a letter to the Duke of [Aue. 4, 1778.] 

ra{ton, showed much sagacity in penetrating the in- 
tentions of France and Spain to assist the Americans: ‘ Keppel’s en- 
gagement with the French fleet is only the beginning of this cursed war. 
1 don’t apprehend the French avoided the action through fear but policy, 
and that they came.out of Brest only to provoke Keppel to make the 
first assault, so as to be justified in America, by maintaining England 
to be the aggressor, and so to bring the war within the case of their 
treaty of alliance, by which America is bound to assist, and, indeed, to 
be a principal in the French war, and Keppel’s chasing will be called 
the first assault, These are my politics, for | am, as I always have 
been, persuaded that France was determined at all events to make the 
war, and [ am equally certain that Spain will join, notwithstanding the 
Spanish ambassador’s journey hither, which is no better than an im- 
posture, and that too shallow to impose on any but children and our 
ministers,” 

In the Session of 1779, Lord Camden entered into a laborious ex- 
posure of the abuses of Greenwich Hospital, which were rendered 
famous as the subject of Lord Erskine’s first speech at the bar ;—and 
he was of essential service in rendering this noble establishment more 
serviceable to our brave seamen. 

He then made an effort to obtain liberal measures for Ireland, which, 
being withheld, up sprang the volunteers, who petitioned with arms in 
their hands: ‘“‘I hope and believe,” said he, ‘‘ notwithstanding the ill 
treatment the Irish have received from this country which has brought 
upon them an accumulation of distresses and calamities, they will still 
retain their affection and attachment for England. Let us meet them 
with generous kindness, Nothing should be done by halves—nothing 
niggardly—accompanied with apparent reluctance,” * 

Soon after, in a debate on pensions and sinecures, being taunted 
about his own penszov, or as we should call it ‘¢ retired allowance,” he 
said ‘he received it for long services, and in lieu of a valuable office 
(Chief Justice of the Common Pleas) and it would be a hardship to his 
family to lose it, and the reversion which was to supersede it; but if 
they must be included in a measure for clearing away abuses, he should 
rejoice in it, however the loss might distress him, when he reflected on 
the great and permanent advantages which would thereby accrue 
to his country.” 

In the autumn of this year Lord Camden proposed to the Duke of 
Grafton a new plan of operations to be pursued by [Sepr. 16, 1779.] 
the Opposition :—‘ A conversation with your Grace 
upon the state of the kingdom at present, will give me as much satis- 
faction as I am capable of receiving upon so hopeless a subject. If 
your Grace can suggest any plan of proceeding for the Opposition, 
likely to change the Court system or animate the public, I shall be 
happy to adopt as well as to promote it. For my own part, I confess 


* 20 Parl. Hist. 670, 1177. t 14 Parl. Hist. 1363, 


250 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


fairly my own opinion that the opposition to the Court is contracted to 
a handful of men within the walls of Parliament, and that the people 
without doors are either indifferent or hostile to any opposition at all. 
Whether this singular and unexampled state of the country is owing to 
a consciousness among the people that they are as much to blame as 
the Ministers, and are ashamed to confess their own error, or whether, 
in truth, they hold the Opposition so cheap as to think the kingdom 
would suffer instead of mending by the exchange, or from a combina- 
tion of all these motives choose to suffer patiently rather than encounter 
the troubles that are apt to follow upon a general disturbance : whatever 
is the cause of that slavish resignation which is predominant at present, 
the fact is, they do not desire a change. What then is to be done in 
order to obtain some degree of popularity? I shall make a simple an- 
swer by saying, ‘ Nothing /’ and yet perhaps that nothing, if well con- 
ducted, might have a stronger operation than the vain repetition of those 
feeble efforts that have hitherto been made in Parliament by perpetual 
wrangles, personal animosity, abuse, and bad language, for this attack 
has been returned twofold upon us, and has set the parties against each 
other like a couple of prize-fighters combating for the entertainment of 
the gazing public, who are greatly diverted by a blow soundly given or 
dexterously parried, without a wish for the victory of either of the 
combatants, This has been the conduct of opposition hitherto. If, on 
the other hand, a firm and temperate opposition in short speeches, a few 
debates without rancour, could be established, such a course might 
probably restore us to the good opinion of the public, and then the 
distress of the times might work them into an opinion that the Opposi- 
tion mean really the good of the whole. ‘This or any idea may serve 
to talk of, but, to say the truth, I have no hopes left for the public, 
the whole people have betrayed themselves, and are not worth 
fighting for.” 

In the session of 1780 Lord Camden delivered a very long and ani- 
mated speech in answer to Lord Thurlow, now Chancellor, who was 
resolved to throw out a bill which the Commons had passed almost 
unanimously, to disqualify government contractors from sitting in their 
House. He began by observing that ‘“* his noble and learned friend on 
the woolsack had maintained his opposition to the bill in contradiction 
to the clearest principles of the constitution, indeed to. every rule of 
common sense and common experience, and to the whole system of 
parliamentary jurisprudence. His noble and learned friend had ex- 
pressed himself in very strong language against innovation, and had 
rallied their Lordships to the post of danger, as if the constitution were 
to be overturned; but might not the same opposition have been given 
in the same words to bills now universally acknowledged to be neces- 
sary to preserve the purity and efficiency of our representative system, 
—the Place Bill, the Pension Bill, and the Bill for disqualifying officers 
of the Excise or Customs from sitting in the other House, because they 
may be preferred or dismissed at the pleasure of the Crown? Would 
his noble and learned friend have called these measures ‘ ¢dle and fan- 


LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN. 251 


ciful suggestions, the phrensy of virtue and the madness of ideal per- 
Section?” The bill was rejected by a majority of 61 to 41,—a deci- 
sion which rendered the Lords very odious, the Commons a few days 
before having passed the famous resolution moved by Dunning,—* that 
the power of the Crown has increased, is increasing, and ought to be 
diminished,”* 

A debate took place, in the beginning of 1781, on the King’s message 
relative to the rupture with Holland, which rendered ie 
the situation of public affairs still more difficult and ESSA BE 
alarming. There being, as yet, no symptom of any change of policy 
on the part of the Government, Lord Camden, rising with great solem- 
nity, and speaking in a tone of the deepest grief, said, ‘‘ He rose from a 
call of duty, for the last time, and, whatever might be the event of this 
final effort to save his country, at least to mitigate her distresses and 
misfortunes, he should retire from his fruitless attendance in that House 
with this consolation, that he had discharged his duty to the best of his 
poor abilities so long as it promised to be productive of the smallest or 
remotest good, and that he declined giving their Lordships any further 
trouble where hope was at an end, and when zeal even had no object 
which could call it into activity. He regretted that he had not formed 
the resolution earlier, as he should thus have been saved from much 
chagrin and a series of the most mortifying disappointments, for he had 
been able, in no degree, to prevent or retard the ruin which now seemed 
impending.” t 

He interfered no farther with any political question during this pro- 
tracted session; but in the recess which followed there was 

: a , [Nov. 27.] 
such a loud expression of public opinion against the war, 
and such strong rumours were circulated of Lord North’s wish to retire, 
that, when Parliament reassembled, he attended to make another effort 
for peace. His speech on supporting the amendment, moved by Lord 
Shelburne, was, I think, decidedly the best he ever delivered in Parlia- 
ment, and it is fully and correctly reported; but, to its credit, there is 
no passage in it which I can select for quotation, Instead of aiming at 
fine sentences, (the sin which most easily beset him,) he confined him- 
self to a simple and rapid narrative of facts,—from which he deduced 
the incapacity of ministers, and attempted to show that the only chance 
of saving the empire from final ruin, as well as dismemberment, was 
by an immediate change of men and of measures. 

The extraordinary merit of this speech is said to be demonstrated by 
the eulogy which it extorted from the unwilling Thurlow who followed 
in the debate ;f£ but, with more doubtful claims to praise, it might pos- 
sibly have been very favourably criticised by this dissembler, who, un- 
der the guise of bluntness, had ever a keen eye to his own advantage, 
and who, seeing a change approaching, was rather willing to soothe 
opponents, and to show that his enmities were placable. Whatever 
might be his motives, he thus began: “I must acknowledge, my Lords, 


* 21 Pari. Hist. 340, 414-459, +21 Parl. Hist. 1060. 
¢ See Lord Brougham’s “ Statesmen of George III.” 3d series, 177. 


252 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


the great abilities of the noble and learned Lord who has just sat down. 
I affirm that, to the best of my judgment, I never heard a more able 
discourse within these walls: the premises were openly and clearly 
stated, and the deductions followed without constraint or false colouring. 
I trust that the noble and learned Lord will receive these as my real 
sentiments, for | am not at any time much in the habit of travelling 
out of the business before the House, to keep up the trivial forms of 
debate—much less to pay particular personal compliments to any man,” 
He then proceeded to combat the amendment,—which was negatived 
by 75 to 31—but which he well knew embodied the sentiments of a 
majority of both Houses,* 

The crisis soon arrived, Lord North declaring in the House of Com- 

; mons on the day fixed for Lord Surrey’s motion on 
ey ee aah! Gece) the state of tis nation,” that ‘* his Majesty’s mi- 
nisters were no more.”t Now was formed the second Rockingham 
administration, and the Whigs, till they quarrelled among themselves, 
were completely in the ascendant. There was considerable difficulty 
in disposing of the Great Seal. Lord Camden might no doubt have 
resumed it with the full concurrence of all sections of the party, but for 
twelve long years he had been unaccustomed to daily judicial drudgery ; 
he was now verging upon seventy, and his attacks of the gout were 
becoming more frequent and more severe. He, therefore, preferred the 
office of President of the Council. 

It has always been unaccountable to me, that, on his declining the 
Great Seal, it was not given to Dunning, a most consummate lawyer, 
as well as a great debater and a zealous Whig.—If he unaccountably 
preferred the Duchy of Lancaster, the subordinate office conferred upon 
him, why was not the Great Seal given to Sir Fletcher Norton, who 
had become a favourite with the Rockingham Whigs, and was most 
eager for judicial elevation? The king, no doubt, was desirous that 
Thurlow should still. be the ‘* Keeper of his Conscience,” so that he 
might have a ‘ frzend” in the Cabinet ; but his wishes at that moment 
might easily have been controlled. I suspect that the Shelburne and 
Rockingham sections continued distinct even at the formation of the 
government, Dunning belonging to the former, and Norton to the 
latter, and that neither would agree to the appointment of the other’s 
lawyer to the woolsack. ‘This jealousy was openly manifested in a few 
days, for although it be the province of the Prime Minister to “take 
the King’s pleasure” with respect to the creation of peers, Dunning was 
made Baron Ashburton, on the advice of Lord Shelburne, without the 
knowledge of Lord Rockingham; whereupon Lord Rockingham imme- 
diately insisted that Norton should be made Baron Grantley. Thus 
the Great Seal remained in the clutch of Thurlow, who hated all Whigs 
of all degrees with a most perfect hatred, and could not possibly be 


expected cordially to act in a government founded on principles which 
he had uniformly and vehemently opposed, 


* 22 Parl, Hist. 637-679. t Ib. 1214. 


LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN. 253 


CHAPTER CXLVI. 


CONTINUATION OF THE LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN TILL THE KING’S 
ILLNESs IN 1785. 


Tue inconvenience of having Thurlow for Chancellor was soon ex- 
perienced by the new government. ‘Lord Rockingham and Lord Shel- 
burne both agreed upon the propriety of carrying the ‘* Contractors’ 
Bill,” which had been lately rejected,—and by way of redeeming their 
pledges, and maintaining their popularity, the reintroduction of it was 
one of their first measures. In the House of Lords it was fiercely at- 
tacked by the ‘‘ Keeper of the King’s conscience,” who was thus an- 
swered by his colleague, Lord Camden, the new Lord’President of the 
Council: ‘* My Lords, I must express my astonishment at the laborious 
industry exerted by the noble and learned Lord on the woolsack. I 
can only suppose that he wishes to eke out a long debate, which (con- 
fining ourselves to solid and rational discussion) might, in my humble 
apprehension, have terminated in half an hour. The bill presents to 
my mind but one idea; it is simple and obvious. The noble and 
learned Lord said its principles should be examined, and, in that single 
observation of all he addressed to you, I agree with him. I believe 
there is no noble Lord present who doubts of the existence of ‘ undue 
influence’ in one shape or another, however denominated, or whatever 
aspect it may lately have assumed. A very distinguished member of 
the other House,* now transferred into this on account of his great 
talents and inflexible political integrity, moved a resolution which was 
carried against the minister by a considerable majority,—‘ That the in- 
fluence of the Crewn has increased, is increasing, and ought to be dimi- 
nished.’ This is a full recognition on record of the existence of that 
evil which the principle of the bill was calculated to remove. 1 will not 
say that an improper or corrupt influence has ever in any instance 
operated on any of your Lordships. My regard for the purity and 
dignity of this assembly forbids me to entertain such a suspicion, Ne- 
vertheless, [ most heartily concur in the resolution of my noble and 
learned friend, which we must not allow to remain a dead letter, but 
make the foundation of practical improvement. [can hardly believe 
that the noble and learned Lord was serious in denying the existence of 
all public corruption. Thank God! as far as my means and poor ca- 
pacity could be exerted, I have uniformly set my face against it. I can 
assure your Lordships that the hope of assisting to remove this cause of 
our national misfortunes constituted one of the prime inducements for 
my taking a part in the administration. My colleagues in office, who 


* Dunning, Lord Ashburton, See 21 Parl. Hist. 340, 6th April, 1780; majority, 
233 to 215. 


254 REIGN OF GEORGE IIL 


entered into the King’s councils along with me, I am sure are animated 
by a firm and unanimous resolution to reform all abuses, to promote 
public economy, and to give their Sovereign and the nation such proofs 
of their sincerity, as must put it out of the power of any set of men to 
deprive them of their only means of solid support. ‘The noble and 
learned Lord has tried to compel your Lordships to reject this bill, be- 
cause you rejected a similar bill two years before, He seeks to deprive 
you of the exercise of your understanding, and to deprive the public of 
all advantage from the removal of prejudice and the advancement of 
knowledge. The bill is different in some of its provisions, and your 
Lordships are considering it under altered circumstances, ‘This bill is 
part of a general plan of reform. ‘To effectuate so great a work my 
friends have been invited by the public voice to take office. If this bill 
be thrown out, there is an end of the present administration; they 
would be no more. Having failed in our expectations, we being unable 
to carry the measures which while in opposition we recommended to 
those in power, the nation would regard us with indignation if we con- 
tinued to draw our salaries while we are under the dictation of those 
whom we despise. Corrupt and incapable as the last ministers were, I 
am free to confess, my Lords, that in that case it would be much better 
that they should be restored to power. They may possibly amend ; 
but by remaining in office without the confidence of Parliament and 
under the necessity of abandoning our objects, we should become daily 
more degraded and more contemptible, and we should not only ruin our 
own characters, but extinguish all confidence in public men, essentially 
injure the country, and take away all hope of better times.” 

Thurlow continued a most vexatious opposition to the bill in the com- 
mittee,—denouncing it as “a jumble of contradictions ;” but Lord Camden 
left the farther defence of it to the two new law Lords, Lord Ashburton 
and Lord Grantley, and they fleshed their maiden swords in various 
rencounters with the * blatant beast’’ who tried to tread them down. In 
some of the divisions the ministerial majority was not more than Zo, 
The bill was carried, but the administration was much shaken by this 
sample of the manner in which it was to be thwarted by the * King’s 
friends.”* ; 

Lord Camden’s next speech in the House of Lords was in support of 

~oo _ the bill to declare the legislative independence of Ire- 
[May 17, 1782.] land, which had bebornie necessary rene the deter- 
mined: efforts of the Irish ‘ Volunteers,” in consequence of moderate 
and reasonable concessions being long denied to the sister kingdom. 
This measure was prudent under existing circumstances, with a civil 
war raging, and foreign enemies multiplying around us; but any pru- 
dent statesman might have foreseen that it could not permanently be 
the basis of the connexion between the two islands. ‘The Parliament of 
Ireland and the Parliament of Great Britain being equally supreme and 
independent, they must ere long differ on questions of vital importance, 


* 22 Parl. Hist. 1356-1382. 


_ LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN. 255 


without an arbiter to reconcile them; and if, from any calamity, the 
power of the Crown should be in abeyance, every tie which bound them 
together would be severed. Lord Loughborough urged, ‘that when 
there was no check upon the Irish Parliament but the mere vero upon 
bills, and the government of each country was to move in perfect 
equality, his Majesty would not be King in Ireland in any different 
manner from that in which he might be sovereign of any other separate 
territory. The contiguity of position might preserve a more constant 
intercourse between the subjects of both, and the communion of rights 
unite them more closely to each other; but it was a possible case, that 
their interests might be supposed to be conflicting, and what then was 
to preyent their separation ?” 

Lord Camden, not being able to solve these difficulties, and not ven- 
turing to hint at the remedy of a legislative union, regretted ‘that any 
debate had arisen on the subject; ‘saying, that unanimity would have 
given the best chance of efficiency to a measure that must pass.” He 
spoke much of the virtues of the Irish, and the hardships they had suf- 
fered. ‘* The right of binding Ireland by a British statute could not be 
exercised. Why then should the right be claimed? His noble and 
learned friend had not suggested any other practicable course than to 
agree to this bill. There was no difficulty in renouncing our right of 
judicature ; so far it was a matter entirely for the consideration of the 
Irish ; and as they now had a House of Lords consisting of men of 
great wisdom, knowledge, and integrity, assisted by their Judges, sup- 
posed to be well qualified to advise in matter of law, they were quite 
rigbt in wishing to decide their own lawsuits at home. With regard 
to legislation there was more difficulty ; but the present demand from 
the Parliament of Ireland only echoed the voice of a brave, a generous, 
and an armed people; and he dreaded what might ensue if its justice 
or expediency were questioned.”* The bill was very properly passed, 
with little more discussion; but, within seven years, upon the mental 
malady of George II[.—according to the doctrine which prevailed, that 
it lay with the two Houses of Parliament to supply the deficiency— 
there might have been a choice of two different regents for the two 
islands; and, in point of fact, the two islands were about to appoint the 
same regent by very different means, and with very different powers. 

Soon afterwards came the disruption of the Whig government, by the 
death of the Marquess of Rockingham, and the appointment of Lord 
Shelburne to succeed him. Lord Camden was of opinion, (and I must 
say with due deference to such names as Fox, Burke, and Lord John 
Cavendish,) was rightly of opinion that there was no sufficient ground 
for ministers to throw up their employments in a crisis of such danger 
‘to the state. The new premier was not generally popular; but he was 
of liberal principles, he was of good abilities, he was a magnificent 
patron of learning and genius; and the Rockinghams, though person- 


* 23 Parl. Hist. 44. See Lord Camden’s Letter on this subject, 13th Aug, 1784, 
post. 


256 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


ally disliking him, had been sitting with him in the same cabinet. A 
denial of the right of the King, under these circumstances, to prefer him, 
was something very much like an entire extinction of the royal authority 
by a political junto. Lord Camden, therefore, retained his office of Presi- 
[Frn. 1783.] dent of the Council till he was ejected by the formation 
i ‘} of the ‘Coalition Ministry.” He was much grieved to 
be separated from political friends to whom he was sincerely attached, 
—and chagrined to be brought into closer contact with Lord. Thurlow, 
whose consequence in the cabinet was much enhanced; but he ear- 
nestly superintended the negotiations for peace, and laboured to bring 
them to a favourable issue.* 

Soon after the formation of Lord Shelburne’s government, it was in 
great danger from internal dissensions. The Duke of Grafton had 
been induced by Lord Camden to join it, and to accept the Privy Seal. 
Probably forming an exaggerated notion of his own importance, from 
his superior rank and the political station he had once filled, he thought 
himself slighted and thus disclosed his griefs to his old friend : 

‘‘T begin to feel now what I have thought often before—that a Lord 

a7 Privy Seal, who is not known and understood to be 

Luiy,28, 1782.) con identially trusted and consulted by the principal 
minister, cuts but a silly figure at a cabinet. If he is wholly silent, and 
tacitly comes in to all that is brought there, he becomes insignificant— 
as he is deemed officious and troublesome if his opinions urge him to 
take a more active part than his office appears to call from him. [ 
have too much warmth and zeal in my disposition not to be drawn into 
the latter; and my spirit revolting at the former, I find that | must 
make my retreat if my suspicions should be realized, and that the Karl 
of Shelburne circumscribed his confidence towards me within the bounds 
of great czvility and appearance of communication.” After at great 
length stating the means with which he had connected himself with 
Lord Shelburne, and his supposed il usage, he says, “‘I had once re- 
solved from a dislike to suspense, to have told you all J thought and 
felt on the subject ; but it is knowing too little of mankind to think that 
opinions or real confidence can be forced. You may as well force love, 
and [ was and think I shall reniain silent. However, it has eased my 
mind in some degree to have opened my design to your Lordship. 
We have moved so much on the same principle, that I cannot help 
wishing to hear what you say about me. My case is particular: re- 
collect the situation | have been in, and that, thank God! I have no- 
thing I want, and nothing I fear from any minister; and, above all, 
that my domestic peace and happiness ought to be most the object 


* While the negotiations for peace were going on, it would appear that the Presi- 
dent of the Council was confidentially consulted respecting the different articles, 
There was now, as there had been at antecedent periods, a disposition to restore 
Gibraltar to Spain; but this he strenuously resisted. ‘ With Lord Camden,” says 
the Duke of Grafton, “I had much conversation; he appeared to me to lean now 
considerably to the opinion that Gibraltar is of more consequence to this kingdom, 
and that the views of its ministers ought in future to look to the possession of it as 
an object of more value than at first imagined ; as likewise that the cession of it, even 
on good terms, would be grating to the feelings of the nation.”—Journal, 1782. 


LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN. 257 


of my wishes and pursuits, and then say, my dear Lord, if I am not 
right.” 

Thus Lord Camden replied: ‘I have seen and observed with in- 
finite conan that Lord S. has by ne» means treated [Ave. 1, 1782.] 
your Grace with that confidence | expected, after you 
had so earnestly laboured to support his new administration, not, only 
by taking so important a post in it yourself, but by keeping others 
steady who were wavering at that critical moment. I] am myself an 
instance and a proof of your Grace’s endeavours, for your persuasion 
had more force with me than any other motive to remain in my present 
office. I was therefore disappointed, seeing the Karl of S. so negligent 
in his attention to your Grace; as if, when his administration was 
settled, he had no farther occasion for those to whom he was indebted 
for the credit of his situation. Your Grace’s real importance demanded 
the openest communication, and your friendship the most confidential re- 
turn, and therefore I cannot be wholly without suspicion that his Lord- 
ship means to take a line and pursue a system not likely to meet with 
your Grace’s approbation ; and if he does, I am not surprised at his re- 
serve ; for where there is a fundamental difference of opinion there can 
be no confidence. However, I will not suffer my suspicions to operate 
with me till I have demonstration by facts. Lord 8. continues to make 
professions of adhering to those principles we all avowed upon the first 
change, and he has pledged himself publicly to support them—in which 
respect it is but reasonable to wait some time for the performance of 
his promises. At the same time I do readily admit your Grace’s dig- 
nity, rank, and former situation require something more, and you ought 
not, as Duke of Grafton, to submit to so under a part with the Earl of 
Shelburne as to be Privy Seal without confidence. But considering the 
perilous condition of the public at this conjuncture, [ should be much 
concerned if your Grace was to take a hasty resolution of retiring just 
now, because your retreat would certainly be followed by other resigna- 
tions, and would totally wawhig the administration, if I may use the 
expression ;* and this second breach following so quick upon the first, 
would throw the nation into a ferment. It will not be possible when the 
Parliament meets for Lord S, to conceal or disguise his real sentiments ; 
and if it should then appear that the government in his hands is to be 
rebuilt upon the old bottom of influence, your Grace will soon have an 
opportunity of making your retreat on better grounds than private dis- 

ust. 
“ “¢] am not more fortunate than your Grace in sharing his Lordship’s 
confidence. Yet, though ‘! am bound only for three months,’ and have 
the fair excuse of age to plead, I would not willingly risk the chance of 
any disturbance at this time by an abrupt resignation, but would rather 
wish if such a measure should hereafter become necessary to take it in 


* The only other occasion I recollect of this word being used was when Mr, Fox, 
on the King’s illness, having contended that the heir apparent was entitled as of 
right to be Regent, Mr, Pitt said, “ For this doctrine I will ‘unwhig’ him for the 
rest of his days.” 


VOL. V. 1M 







258 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


conjunction with others upon public grounds. I am, besides, but too 
apprehensive that more than one of us will be ripe for it, perhaps before 
the Session. Lord K., I know from certainty, will quit after the cam- 
paign. The D. of R.’s discontent is marked in his countenance ; and 
if the Whigs should desert, neither G. C., nor Mr. Pitt, nor even Mr. 
T., would have the courage to remain behind. I do not, my dear Lord, 
conceive it possible that a cabinet composed as ours is can be of long 
duration ; especially if Lord 8. confines his confidence to one or two of 
those possibly obnoxious to the others. J have had a long friendship 
for the Earl, and cannot easily be brought over to act a hostile part 
against him, and for that, as well as other reasons, cannot help ex- 
pressing my own wishes that your Grace may wait awhile ; at least till 
you have received most evident conviction of his indifference to your 
opinions and assistance.””* 

The Duke of Grafton says: ‘ Lord Camden’s advice prevailed, and I 
readily acquiesced in his opinion on this occasion, as I was always in- 
clined to do on most others.”* Thus harmony was restored, and Lord 
Shelburne’s government went on with some vigour till the preliminaries 
of peace were signed. 

Mr. Fox and Lord North, by their ill-starred union, having then 
obtained in the House of Commons a large majority, and passed a vote 
of censure on the terms agreed to, parties were thrown into a state of 
unexampled confusion. Lord Shelburne was still unwilling to retire, 
and hoping to create a difference between the chiefS associated for his 
overthrow, meditated to form a coalition himself either with the one or the 
other of them. Meanwhile his colleagues strongly pressed him to resign. 
The Duke of Grafton demanded an audience of the King, and acting 
singly, though with the approbation of Lord Camden, surrendered the 
Privy Seal into the King’s hands, on account of his disagreement with 
the head of the Cabinet. His Grace, after relating his conversation with 
George III., gives a very lively sketch of the state of the ministry at 
this time : ‘¢ Previously to my going to St. James’s, Lord Camden called 
on me, and imparted all that he found himself at liberty to say of a very 
serious conversation he had that morning with the Earl of Shelburne, 
who had sent for Lord Camden, as he now and then did when he found 
himself in difficulties, and on this occasion to consult Lord Camden on 
the part it became the Earl to take. The substance of Lord Camden’s 
advice was decisive, and nearly this: that Lord Shelburne should retire, 
as unfortunately it plainly appeared that the personal dislike was too 
strong for him to attempt to stem with any hope of credit to himself, 
advantage to the King, or benefit to the country ; that he had it in his 
power to retire now with credit and the approbation of the world, for 
whatever the acts and powers of united parties had expressed by 
votes in Parliament, &c., still the nation felt themselves obliged to him 
for having put an end to such a war by a peace which exceeded the ex- 
pectations of all moderate, fair-judging men. Lord Camden further said 


* Journal, Aug. 1782. 





LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN. 259 


to his Lordship, that he might add lustre to his retreat by prevailing on 
the King to call on the body of the Whigs to form an administration as 
comprehensive-as could be. Lord Camden went further by saying, that 
if Lord Shelburne could not be prevailed on to take either of the steps 
which would give him most credit with the world, and that he was still 
from engagement or inclination instigated to stand as minister, he had 
nothing better to advise than that his Lordship should,- with manly 
courage, avow a close junction with Lord North’s party, if he could so 
manage it, This, indeed, might enable his Lordship to carry an admi- 
nistration which a middle way and a partial junction never would effect. 
Lord Camden added, that he thought the last scheme to be that which 
ought, if possible, to be avoided. I observed to Lord Camden that I 
was Clear, notwithstanding the advice, that Lord Shelburne preferred it 
to all the others, and such would be his decision. ‘The object of sending 
for Lord Camden, | believe, was with the hopes to draw him into his 
opinion if he was able, and by no means to take his advice unless it 
could be made to coincide with the part he was decided to take, though 
he did not perceive that it was now too late for his plan to succeed. 
Lord Camden freely acquainted Lord Shelburne that he could not re- 
main at any rate, that the whole was new modelled, and that he must 
claim his right of retiring at three months, and which had been stipulated 
at Lord Rockingham’s death. Lord Camden urged to him strongly the 
propriety of his coming to his decision before two days were expired : 
the other inclined to see the event of as many months.—On the 2Ist, 
Lord Camden called on me in the morning, and after much lamentation 
on the alarming state of public matters, he told me that he was fully de- 
termined to quit his office, but that he should take every precaution to 
make it particularly clear that his resignation should not be interwoven 
with Lord Shelburne’s retreat: he was anxious that his Lordship’s con- 
duct on the present occasion should neither guide his in reality, nor in 
appearance. Lord Camden’s decision pleased me much, as I told him, 
for his character entitled him to take his own part whenever he thought 
the ground good and honourable, without being actuated by the decision 
of any person whatever,” 

Lord Camden accordingly resigned in a few days after, and Mr. 
Fox and Lord North remaining steady to their engagements, not- 
withstanding all the attempts which were made to disunite them, Lord 
Shelburne was obliged to retire,—the cabinet was stormed,—and, for a 
brief space, the ** Coalition Ministry” was triumphant. 

Lord Camden now went into violent opposition, and listed himself 
under the banner of the younger Pitt, delighted to recognise in him the 
brilliant talents and the lofty aspirations of the friend of his youth, 
his political patron, and the associate of his old age—with whom he 
had long fought the battles of the constitution.* 

When Mr. Fox’s India Bill, after its most stormy passage through the 


* It might truly have been said of Lord Chatham and Lord Camden, that in many 
“a glorious and well-foughten field they kept together in their Chivalry.” 


260 REIGN OF GEORGE IIL 


Commons, at last reached the House of Lords, it was 
[Dzc. 9, 1783.] ~. ? Lis . 

violently assailed by the Ex-chancellor, who denounced 
its priociple as being an arbitrary infringement of the property and the 
rights of the greatest company in the world. ‘This bill,” he said, 
‘‘ was tantamount to a commission of bankruptcy, or a commission of 
lunacy against them: it pronounced them to be unable to proceed in 
their trade, either from want of property, or from want of mental ca- 
pacity. ‘The only argument for this violent measure was that of neces- 
sity—which had been used by the worst kings and the worst ministers 
for the most atrocious acts recorded in history. ‘The only necessity for 
the bill was, that ministers might preserve their power, and increase their 
patronage. The author of the bill was himself to appoint to every office 
in India. The influence of the Crown had been, to a certain degree, 
curtailed by late reforms, but now it would be infinitely greater than 
when one section of the present government had beaten the other on the 
resolution that ‘ the influence of the Crown had increased, was increas- 
ing, and ought to be diminished.’ He lamented the death of the Mar- 
quis of Rockingham, who, had he survived, would have adhered steadily 
to the doctrines of Whiggism, and he lamented still more deeply that 
some of those who called themselves his friends, should now favour a 
measure so inconsistent with the principles which it had been the labour 
of that great man’s life to establisb.”’* 

The bill being rejected in the House of Lords by a majority of 95 
to 76, the * Coalition Ministry” being dismissed, and William Pitt, at the 
age of twenty-four, being made prime minister, it was expected that 
Lord Camden would immediately have resumed his office of President 
of the Council,—and this would have happened had he not waived his 

claim, that he might facilitate the new arrangements. 
[Dec. 19, 1783. ] Ear! Gower, afterwards Marquis of Stafford, although 
he had never had the slightest intercourse with Mr, Pitt, entertained a 
great admiration of his talents and his character, and sent him a mes- 
sage by a confidential friend, that “‘ desiring to enjoy retirement for the 
rest of his life, he had no wish for any office, but that in the present 
situation of the King, and distressed state of the country, he would 
cheerfully take any office in which it might be thought he could be use- 
ful.” His name and experience were likely to be of great benefit to 
Mr. Pitt at this moment,—particularly as Lord Temple, after holding 
the Seal of Secretary of State for a few days, had thrown it up. The 
presidency of the council, with high rank, and little work, was thought 
the post which would be most suitable and agreeable to Lord Gower. 
He was accordingly appointed to'it, and held it during the stormy ses- 
sion which ensued, when the young minister, supported by the King and 
the nation, fought his gallant fight against the combined bands of Tories 
and Whic¢s who had vowed his destruction. 

Although the rejection of the India Bill by the Lords had put an end 

ny 66 it] Inictru 2? . 
[Dec. 1783] to ih «Coalition Ministry, iene was pees tran- 
quillity in their House for the rest of the session, while 
th>2 storm was raging in the House of Commons—insomuch that Lord 


* 24 Parl. Hist. 190. 


LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN. 261 


Camden, although prepared to support the new administration, had no 

occasion to come forward once in their defence, 

When the session was closed by a prorogation, and pM twee ih 1524 
é Miia pty ’ 

Parliament being dissolved, the people pronounced decidedly against 

the Coalition, Mr. Pitt’s difficulties were over, and he 2 

was in the proudest situation ever occupied by a minister EM aes ABAe} 

P r P y, 

under an English sovereign. 

Lord Gower’s assistance might now have been dispensed with, but 
his taste of office had pleased him, and he felt no inclination to with- 
draw again into private life. Lord Camden would not put the Govern- 
ment to any inconvenience by an impatient desire to resume his office, 
and during the recess he paid a long visit to Jreland, with the double 
object of seeing his favourite daughter, and of acquiring information to 
enable him to assist in carrying the important measures which the 
minister was about to bring forward for the establishment of a free 
trade between the two countries, 

While there he wrote the Duke of Grafton the following letter on 
Parliamentary Reform, giving a most interesting view of the state of 


‘public feeling among the Irish, after they had obtained “ indepen- 


dence :”— 

«There is one question which seems to have taken possession of the 
whole kingdom, and that is the reform of Parliament [Aue. 13, 1784.] 
—about which they seem very much in earnest. 
Those who wish so much for that reformation at home, cannot with 
much consistence refuse it to Ireland, and yet their corrupt Parliament 
must be considered the only means we have left to preserve the union 
between the two countries, But that argument will not bear the light, 
and no means ought in my opinion to be adopted too scandalous to be 
avowed. I foresaw when we were compelled to grant independence 
to Ireland the mischief of the concession, and that sooner or later a civil 
war would be the consequence—a consequence ruinous to England but 
fatal to Ireland, for she must at all events be enslaved either to England 
or France. This people are intoxicated with their good fortune, and 
wish to quarrel with England to prove their independence. Big with 
their own importance, and proud of their ‘ Volunteers,’ they are a 
match, as they imagine, for the whole world. But as Galba describes 
the Romans,—‘ Nec totam servitutem pati possunt, nec totam libertatem,’ 
This misfortune would never have happened if our government had not 
been tyrannical and oppressive.” 

On Lord Camden’s return to England, a negotiation was opened for 
his restoration to the Cabinet. He consented on the condition that an 
effort should be made that his old chief, the Duke of Grafton, might 
join the administration. Mr. Pitt was pleased with the proposal, for he 
still professed himself to be a stout Whig, and he wished to have some 
counterbalance in his government to the Sidneys, the Gowers, and the 
Thurlows. The plan was to transfer Lord Gower to the Privy Seal, 
and to make Lord Carmarthen resign his office of Secretary of State, 


- Lord Camden thus writes to the Duke of Grafton, giving him an ac- 


262 REIGN OF GEORGE IIl 


count of the negotiation :—“ Mr, P. told me he had mentioned to Lord 
G. his wish that he would consent to exchange his 
PR anal ets office for the Privy Seal, and believed he should find 
no difficulty in obtaining that compliance ; that he had not yet found an 
opportunity of sounding L* C., as it was not easy for him to make sucha 
proposal as might tempt him to retire from his present situation, but that 
it was upon his mind, and that your Grace as well as myself might be 
assured the very moment any vacancy in the Cabinet could be procured 
that your Grace would condescend to accept, it should be done. I must do 
Mr. Pitt the justice to say he expressed as earnest a desire as myself to 
a close and intimate political conjunction with your Grace, and saw 
clearly the great utility of the Cabinet having so clear a Whig com- 
plexion as our accession would give it.” 

In a subsequent letter, Lord Camden, after speaking of the negotia- 

ait ee cehae tion for. the resignation of Lord Carmarthen, says, 
[Ocr. 13, 1784.] ,, If that difficulty is removed, I should hardly allow 
your Grace’s plea of disability, or fear to undertake so arduous an em- 
ployment, to have the weight of an insurmountable objection. If that 
was sufficient in your Grace, who are now in the very vigour of your 
age and the ripeness of your understanding, to warrant a refusal, wha, 
can be said to me, who am in the last stage of life, when both mind an 
body are in a state of decline, and are every day tending towards tota 
incapacity ? In reality, such is my backwardness toembark in business, 
that nothing but the comfort of your Grace’s support and co-operation 
could have prevailed upon me to alter my determined purpose (for so it 
was till I was overruled) for final retirement. And I am afraid, if I 
know my own feelings, I should perhaps be pleased at my heart, and 
almost thank your Grace, if you should, by withdrawing yourself, 
give me an honest excuse for breaking off.—I have read the Dean of 
St. Asaph’s trial, and confess I have seen nothing libellous in the paper, 
and am, besides, more displeased with Judge Buller’s behaviour than I 
was formerly with Lord Mansfield’s. Something ought to be done to 
settle this dispute: otherwise the control of the press will be taken out 
of the hands of the juries in England, and surrendered up to the 
Judges.” 

It was found impossible to prevail on Lord Carmarthen to retire. 
This disappointment Lord Camden communicated in a letter to the Duke 
of Grafton, in which, after stating that no vacancy could then be made 

[Oér. 25, 1784.] for him in the Cabinet, he thus proceeds: ‘ And now, 

my dear Lord, what part does it become me to take? 
I don’t ask your advice, because I have taken my part already, and 
have agreed to come in; but I will state my own difficulties, and the 
true reason that prevailed upon me, at last, to accept. I am more 
averse than ever to plunge again into business in the last stage of my 
life. I do not like the Cabinet, as composed : the times are full of diffi- 
culty, and the C. not much inclined to persons of our description. Add 
to this, my own aversion to business, now almost constitutional from a 
habit of indolence; and, above all, the want of your Grace’s support, 


LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN. 263 


the only circumstance that made me enter into this engagement after I 
had, over and over again, given a positive denial. ‘These, you must 
allow, were weighty considerations; and yet, though I was fairly re- 
leased by Mr, Pitt’s failing to make that opening he had. engaged to 
make, and your Grace’s postponing your acceptance to the end of the 
session, yet, when I considered that Mr. Pitt would be cruelly disap- 
pointed, and perhaps, in some sort, disgraced upon my refusal, after he 
had engaged Lord Gower to exchange his office, and that I was pressed 
in the strongest manner by all my friends, and more particularly by 
your Grace, who was pleased to think my coming forward would be 
useful to the public, and help to establish the administration, I took the 
resolution to vanquish my reluctance, and to sacrifice my own ease to 
the wishes of other men.” 

It was still some weeks before the arrangement was completed, and 
then Lord Camden, after informing the Duke of 
Grafton that Lord Gower had at last actually ex- Oy Shae (oan 
changed the Presidency of the Council for the Privy Seal, adds :-—*“ I 
am now called upon to fill up the vacancy. I go to it with a heavy 
heart, being separated from your Grace, with whom I had intended to 
have closed my political life,—cterwm mersus servilibus undis, ata 
time of life when I ought to have retired to a monastery; but as the 
die is cast, I will go to the drudgery without any more complaining, 
and do my best; as I have lost all ambition, and am happily not i- 
fected with avarice, and as my children are all reasonably provided for, 
according to their rank and station, 1 can have no temptation to do 
wrong; and therefore, though in my present situation, when I do not 
ask the employment but am solicited to accept it, I might, after the 
fashion of the world, put some price upon myself, | am determined 
neither to ask nor to accept any favour or emolument whatever for this 
sacrifice of my own ease. 

“| have employed myself of late in examining with some attention 
the proceedings of the Court of King’s Bench in the libel cause of the 
Dean of St. Asaph, thinking it probable it might have been brought by 
writ of error into our House ; but they have taken care to prevent that 
review by arresting the judgment, and so the great question between 
the Judge and the jury in this important business is to go no further, 
though it is now strengthened by a solemn decision of the Court, which 
never happened before. This determination in my poor opinion strikes 
directly at the liberty of the press, and yet is likely to pass sub szlentto. 
The newspapers are modest upon the subject, because Mr. Erskine is 
not to be commended by one party, or Lord Mansfield run down by the 
other. ‘Thus your Grace sees that public spirit is smothered by party 
politics.” 

Lord Camden, notwithstanding some affectation of reluctance, very 
cheerfully resumed his office of President of the Council, and con- 
tinued to fill it during a period of nine years, always co-operating 
most harmoniously and zealously with the ** Heaven-born Minister,” 
who, although he began to be nicknamed “Billy Pitt the Tory,” 


264 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


and although his zeal for reform did cool considerably, cannot be 
accused of bringing forward any measure which a Whig might not 
have supported, till the aged Lord President had disappeared from the 
scene. 
The session of 1785 was chiefly occupied with the measures to esta- 
[June 18, 1785.] blish free trade with Treland—which were so cre- 
‘ ‘4 ditable to their author—the first English minister, 
who was a pupil of Adam Smith. However, they were furiously op- 
posed by the English manufacturers, with Mr. Peel, the worthy father 
of our Sir Robert, at their head,—foretelling entire ruin to England if 
the laws against the importation of Irish manufactures were removed, 
—as, from the low price of labour, and the lightness of taxation in Ire- 
land, cotton might be spun, muslin woven, and every sort of fabric 
finished there at an infinitely cheaper rate than in England ;—so that if 
the proposed abolition were agreed to, English industry would be para- 
lysed, grass would grow in the streets of Manchester, and we should 
become a nation of paupers. Mr. Peel threatened that he would re- 
move, with his capital and his family, to the sister Isle, which was thus 
to be so highly favoured, at the expense of the mother country. In the 
House of Lords, these views were zealously supported by Lord Stor- 
mont and other Peers. But the resolutions were defended, in a masterly 
speech, by Lord Camden. He said ‘ that to his knowledge, nothing 
but the strongest necessity could have induced the minister to under- 
take a measure so weighty, which, however conducted, was sure to be 
productive of murmurs and discontent among many, who, upon all 
other subjects, were disposed to be his warmest supporters.” He then 
drew an affecting picture of the present wretchedness of Ireland—he de- 
scribed her great natural advantages—he explained her wrongs—he 
sought to create alarm by her loud demands of redress. ‘* The tran- 
quillity of the empire,” said he, “is at stake. The Trish will next lay 
their grievances at the foot of the throne ; and importune the Sovereign 
of both countries to take part with the one against the interest, or rather 
the prejudices, of the other. Here is the foundation of a civil war, 
Does it not become the providence of the government to guard against 
such an emergency? The discontents of the Irish are in proportion to 
their sufferings.”—Having detailed the proposed regulations for esta- 
blishing free trade between the two islands, he considered the objections 
to them. “With respect to the argument of cheapness of labour, 
which has given such terrors to the manufacturers,” he observed, * I 
confess I see it without alarm. This cheapness of labour must only 
continue during the rudeness of art; and, in the meanwhile, the rich 
and manufacturing country must enjoy the benefits of superior skill. 
There the finished article will still be cheaper. As to Mr, Peel, and 
the other intelligent witnesses examined at your bar, who threaten to 
emigrate to Connaught, [ feel no uneasiness. If they really should 
form spinning establishments in that wild region, they may do much to 
civilise and improve it ; and in Lancashire, their place may be supplied 
by others equally enterprising and respectable. They are not more 


LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN. 265 


reasonable than our manufacturers of silk and iron, who call upon us 
to lay such duties upon these articles when exported from Ireland, that 
the Irish may be excluded from competition in supplying them to the 
American market. These requests may all be traced to their true 
source—the itch of monopoly. Let us not have protecting duties on 
one side of the water, with retaliating prohibitions on the other, which 
will foster growing enmity between us, to the delight and aggrandize- 
ment of our common enemies.” ° Still there were thirty votes in the 
negative ; and a protest was signed, I am sorry to say, by Lord Derby, 
Lord Fitewillia; and other Whig Peers, 

When Mr, Pitt again brought forward his motion for a reform in 
Parliament, Lord Camden gave him all the assist- [Marcu 19, 1785.] 
ance and encouragement in his power ; and the fol- 
lowing letter, urging the Duke of Grafton to compel one of his mem- 
bers, who was rather doubtful, to vote for the measure, affords, I think, 
strong evidence of the Premier’s sincerity : 


*‘ My dear Lord, 

‘I find myself under a necessity of troubling your Grace, at Mr. 
Pitt’s request, upon a question which I. have always thought of the 
highest importance to the constitution, | mean the reform of Parliament, 
And, if your Grace thinks upon the subject 3 as I do, you will lend your 
aid, by imparting your wishes to such of your friends as are likely to 
pay attention to your opinion, Mr, Pitt is not assured how Mr. Hop- 
kins stands inclined to this measure, but is very anxious to obtain his 
concurrence, unless he is really and conscientiously averse to it. At 
least he wishes, and would think that he may not unreasonably hope, 
that he would give his vote for bringing in the Bill. When I have said 
this, | have said all that becomes me to say on this occasion, adding 
only that Mr. Pitt’s character, as well as his administration, is in some 
danger of being shaken, if his motion is defeated by a considerable 
majority. I do confess myself to be warmly interested in the event, 
upon every consideration, and that, perhaps, is the best apology I can 
make your Grace for giving you this trouble, leaving it entirely to your 
own wisdom to judge how far it would be fitting or agreeable to your 


Grace to communicate your wishes to Mr. Hopkins. 
“Tam,” &c, 


I will here introduce two letters written at this time, showing, in an 
amusing manner, how an application used to be made, and evaded, to 
promote a Bishop. The individual to be translated was Hinchcliffe, 
who, since the year 1769, had held the poor see of Peterborough, 
where he had been placed by the Duke of Grafton, when Premier. 
The first letter is to his Grace from Lord Camden : 

“‘ | was forced to wait some days before I could meet with an oppor- 
tunity of conferring with Mr. Pitt, and when he had, 
ie full conversation, explained himself, though I LEER y Raid Gate) 
think I perfectly understood the substance, [ would not venture to put 


266 REIGN OF GEORGE IIL 


my own sense upon his words. I begged that he would at his first 
leisure put it down in writing—which I have this day received. But I 
should not care to send it by the common post, unless I should have 
your Grace’s commands for that purpose. ‘To say the truth, I do won- 
der a little, upon reflection, that we have hazarded our correspondence 
as we have done by the post. I will only add, that the answer, as far 
as I can judge, will give your Grace satisfaction. Courtly expressions 
and complimental civility are of course, and go for nothing; but lam 
much mistaken indeed if Mr. P. is. not as sincere in his intentions as 
he is cordial in his expressions.” 
The following is the Prime Minister’s courteous and cautious reply. 


“ Downing Street, Feb. 4, 1786. 
“« My dear Lord, 


‘In answer to the communication your Lordship was so good to 
make to me from the Duke of Grafton, I should be greatly obliged to 
you if you will assure him that from the desire I entertain of showing 
every possible attention to his Grace’s wishes, he may rely on my 
being happy to find an opportunity of recommending the Bishop of 
Peterborough to his Majesty for advancement on the Bench. His Grace 
not having particularly mentioned any specific object, and it being diffi- 
cult to foresee the arrangements which may be taken till a vacancy 
happens in some of the most considerable sees, | can do no more than 
express my general inclination to meet his Grace’s wishes as far as 
circumstances will allow. Indeed I think there is every reason to sup- 
pose that in the course of no very long time openings must occur which 
may admit of some desirable promotion being proposed to the Bishop, 


and it will give me great pleasure whenever it can be done to his 
Grace’s satisfaction. 


‘ « T am ever, 
“© My dear Lord, 
“ With great attachment and regard, 
** Most sincerely yours, 


“W, Pirr, 
“The Rt Hon>!e Lord Camden.” 


As might have been foreseen, Hinchcliffe lived and died Bishop of 
Peterborough. 

On the 13th of May, 1786, Lord Camden’s services to the Minister 
were recognised by his being raised in the peerage ; he was created 
Viscount Bayham, of Bayham Abbey, in the county of Kent, and Earl 
Camden. 

His chief antagonist in the House of Lords, in his later years, was 
Lord Loughborough, who was in hot opposition from the dissolution of 
the ‘ Coalition Ministry,” till he went over with the ‘ Alarmists” at 
the commencement of the French revolution, Against him he ably de- 
fended the East India Judicature Bill,* the Excise Bill,t and other 


* 26 Parl Hist. 131. 


t Being then in his 72d year, he took occasion to declare that his youthful senti- 
ments in favour of the liberty of the subject remained unaltered. “I allow that the 


LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN. 267 


measures of Government ; but Mr, Pitt’s ascendency was now so trium- 
phant, that the Lords had little to do but to amuse themselves with Mr. 
Hastings’s trial, and they had no other debate of permanent interest till 
the nation was thrown into consternation and confusion in the year 
1788 by the King’s illness, 


CHAPTER CXLVIIL. 


CONTINUATION OF THE LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN TILL THE BREAKING 
OUT OF THE FRENCH REVOLUTION, 


Wuen the Sovereign, supposed by the law to be upon the throne, with 
the sceptre in his hand, ruling his people, was actually in a strait 
waistcoat, under the control of keepers,—the royal authority being in 
complete abeyance, steps were necessarily to be taken [a. p. 1788.] 
for the purpose of reviving it. Mr. Pitt, aware of Lord ‘'*~* : 
Thurlow’s intrigue with Carlton House to retain the Great Seal, in case 
of a Regency placed all his confidence in Lord Camden for carrying 
through his plan,—whereby the two Houses were to assert their right 
to provide as they should think fit for the exercise of the prerogatives of 
the Crown, and a Bill was to be passed, according to the usual forms of 
the constitution, appointing the Prince of Wales Regent, under severe 
restrictions, to disable him, as much as possible, from conferring favours 
on the political party to which his Royal Highness was attached. 

On the 20th of November, the day on which Parliament met after the 
prorogation, the Chancellor having announced the royal indisposition, 
Lord Camden moved an adjournment for a fortnight, and that a letter 
of summons should be written to every Peer requiring his attendance. 
In the meanwhile he presided at a meeting of Privy Council, attended 
by all Privy Councillors of whatever party,—at which, the King’s phy- 
sicians, being examined, all agreed that he was wholly incapable of 
meeting Parliament or attending to public business, but differed as to the 
probability of his recovery. On the appointed day, Lord Camden laid 
the examinations before the House. When they bad been (Dec. 4 
read, he observed ‘ that the melancholy state of his Majesty’s soit 


extension of the excise laws is dangerous, and fraught with multifarious mischiefs. 
It unhinges the constitutional righis of juries, and violates the popular maxim that 
‘every man’s house is his castle.’ I have long imbibed these principles; I have 
been early tutored in the school of our constitution, as handed down by our ances- 
tors, and I shall not easily get rid of early predilections, They still hang hovering 
about my heart. These are the new sprouts of an old stalk, Trial by jury is in- 
deed the foundation of our free constitution; take that away, and the whole fabric 
will soon moulder into dust. These are the sentiments of my youtlh,—inculcated 
by precept, improved by experience, and warranted by example. Yet, strange as 
it may appear to your Lordships, the necessity of the case obliges me to give my 
assent to the present bill,’ &c.—26 Parl. Hist. 177. 


268 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


health was sufficiently evinced ; and as the physicians could not give 
their Lordships any assurance as to the time when he would recover, it 
was incumbent on the two Houses of Parliament to proceed to make 
some provision to supply the deficiency in the_legislature, and to restore 
energy to the executive government. Yet, previously to sucha necessary 
and important step, he should take the liberty of moving for a committee 
to search for precedents in similar cases. According to rumour, it had 
been laid down in another place ‘that the course of proceeding under 
such circumstances was prescribed by the common law and the spirit 
of the constitution, viz., that the heir apparent, being of age, was entitled 
to assume the legal authority as a matter of right, and to exercise it as 
long as his Majesty’s disability shall continue, as upon a demise of the 
Crown.’—If this be the common law, it is an entire secret to me. I[ 
never read or heard of such a doctrine. Those that broached it should 
have been ready to cite their authorities. They may raise expectations 
not easily laid, and may involve the country in confusion, ‘The asser- 
tion of this doctrine, however, is a strong argument in favour of my 
motion, for we shall thus have an ample opportunity of considering the 
precedents on which it rests.” 

Lord Loughborough mentioned the extraordinary assertion hazarded 
elsewhere, ‘that the Prince of Wales, the heir apparent to the throne, 
has no more right to take upon himself the government during the con- 
tinuance of the unhappy malady which incapacitates his Majesty than 
any other individual subject,”—contending that an elective regency was 
inconsistent with an hereditary monarchy. Thurlow at this moment 
thought it convenient to deny the Prince’s right,—and after a short re- 
ply from Lord Camden his motion was carried.* 

On the 23d of December, after the report of the committee, Lord 
Camden moved the resolution “ that it is the right and duty of the 
Lords spiritual and temporal, and Commons of Great Britain now as- 
sembled, and lawfully, fully, and freely representing all the estates of 
the people of this nation, to provide the means of supplying the defect 
of the personal exercise of the royal authority, arising from his Ma- 
jesty’s indisposition, in such manner as the exigency of the case may 
appear to them to require.” After a long debate, it was carried by a 
majority of 99 to 66, and was followed by another resolution moved by 
Lord Camden, “ that it is necessary for the two Houses to determine in 
what manner the royal assent shall be given to a bill for settling the 
regency.” t 

On a subsequent day, he moved “that for the purpose of providing 
for the exercise of the King’s royal authority during the continuance of his 

[Jan. 22, 1789.] Majest yee illness, in such manner, and to such ot 
as the circumstances of the nation may appear to re- 

quire, it is expedient that his Royal Highness the Prince of Wales, being 
resident within the realm, be empowered to exercise and administer the 
royal authority in the name and on the behalf of his Majesty, subject 


* 27 Parl, Hist. 654-675. + 27 Parl. Hist. 853, 


LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN. 269 


to such limitations and exceptions as shall be provided.” He thus be- 
gan :—*‘ It is with deep concern that I finda task of such unprecedented 
weight has devolved upon me. I stand up most reluctantly to address 
your Lordships on this occasion, feeling every day stronger and stronger 
reasons to wish to retire from the hurry of business, to repose and con- 
templation. I trust, my Lords, that this is the last act of my _ political 
life. I must not shrink from my duty, for the safety of the monarchy 
and the public tranquillity are at stake.” Having recapitulated the pro- 
ceedings that had been taken since his Majesty’s illness began, and the 
resolutions of the two Houses respecting their right to appoint a Regent 
with such powers as they might confer upon him, he detailed the plan 
of regency which the ministers proposed, explaining and defending the 
regulations for the custody of the King’s person, for preserving the 
household appointments as they then stood, and for preventing the 
Regent from creating Peers, He allowed that the heir apparent was the 
fittest person for the two Houses, in their discretion, to select for Regent ; 
but insisted on the propriety of putting him under restrictions while 
there was any probability of his Majesty being restored to the throne. 
The objection, that inconvenience might arise from so materially cur- 
tailing the power and patronage of the Crown, he answered by obsery- 
ing that ‘‘if the Regent’s administration was conducted on good princi- 
ples, it would meet with general support, and if its measures were un- 
constitutional, there should be no facility given to carrying them 
through.” Notwithstanding powerful arguments to show that our con- 
stitution might suffer serious detriment from the election of a Regent by 
the two Houses, with such powers as they were pleased to bestuw upon 
him, and from tampering with the prerogatives of the Crown, which 
were not supposed to be greater than were necessary to carry on the 
government for the public good, Lord Camden carried his motion by a 
majority of 94 to 68; but a strong protest was signed by the Duke of 
York, and almost all the Peers who voted in the minority.* 

Lord Camden’s next speech was respecting the mode in which the 
Regent should be “elected or appointed.” He de- [Fer. 2, 1789.] 
clared that, ‘amidst a choice of evils, the proposal 
of his Majesty’s ministers, which he was to explain, appeared to him to 
be the least objectionable, and most fit to be adopted, because the most 
reconcilable to the principles [gu@re, forms] of the constitution. He 
was open to conviction, and was ready to adopt any other which their 
Lordships might deem preferable; but something must immediately be 
done to resuscitate the legislature, and to rescue the people from the 
condition, of which they were beginning loudly to complain,—of being 
without a government. He was aware that the plan he was to recom- 
mend had already been made the subject of much ridicule. ‘A phan- 


* 27 Parl. Hist. 1075-1094, In the course of this debate Lord Camden got into 
a scrape, in obviating the objection to the suspension of the power of making Peers, 
by saying, that “on any urgent call for a peerage it might be conferred by act of 
Parliament ”—a proceeding which appeared to their Lordships so unconstitutional 
and republican, that he was obliged to explain and retract. 


270 REIGN OF GEORGE IIL. 


tom!’ “a fiction!’ ‘a forgery!’ and various other contemptuous appella- 
tions, had been bestowed upon it. Let those who objected to it in this 
House show how, otherwise, the constitution could again be put into a 
state of vigour and activity. The delay that had already taken place 
had revolted the public mind, and the nation loudly called on Parliament 
to interpose its authority. But, circumstanced as it at present was, Par- 
liament could not take a single step ;——without the King it was a mere 
headless, inanimate trunk ;—the royal assent was essential to legisla- 
tion. ‘The King upon his throne in that House, or by Commissioners 
appointed under the Great Seal, must sanction their proceedings,— 
which otherwise had no legal operation.. The first step to be taken was 
to open the Parliament by the King’s authority. The law declared 
that, in person or by representative, the King must be there, to enable 
them to proceed as a legislative body. ‘That his Majesty, from illness, 
could not attend personally, was a fact too well known to be disputed. 
When the King could not attend personally, the Jegal and constitutional 
process was, to issue letters patent under the Great Seal. In the pre- 
sent dilemma, therefore, he recommended that the two Houses should 
direct letters patent to be issued, under the Great Seal, authorizing Com- 
missioners to open Parliament in the name of his Majesty. He must 
use the liberty to say, that those who treated this proposal with ridicule 
were ignorant of the laws of their country. A ‘fictéon’ it might be 
termed, but it was a fiction admirably calculated to preserve the con- 
stitution, and, by adopting its forms, to secure its substance. Such a 
commission being indispensable, by whom was it to be ordered? The 
King’s sign-manual, the usual warrant for it, could not be obtained. 
Would it be said that the Prince of Wales could command the Lord 
Chancellor to put the Great Seal to the commission? Both Houses had 
recently resolved that the heir apparent has no such right. Would the 
Lord Chancellor himself venture to do it, of his own accord? Undoubt- 
edly, he would not. ‘The commission must be ordered by some autho- 
rity, for, being once issued with the Great Seal annexed to it, it com- 
manded implicit obedience, and the law would admit no subsequent 
inquiry respecting its validity. He was of opinion that it was in the 
power of the two Houses to direct the Great Seal to be put to the com- 
mission, and’in their power only. The Great Seal was the high instru- 
ment by which the King’s fiat was irrevocably given; it was the clavis 
Regni, the mouth of royal authority, the organ by which the Sovereign 
spoke his will. Such was its efficacy, that even if the Lord Chancel- 
lor, by caprice, put the Great Seal to any commission, it could not after- 
wards be questioned. In so doing he would be guilty ofa misdemeanour, 
but the Judges must give effect to it.* If an act of Parliament receive 
the royal assent by a commission under the Great Seal, ‘‘ Le Roy le 
voet” being so pronounced, it is added to the statute-book, and becomes 
the law of the land, which no one may question. Thus the ‘phantom’ 
would prove a substantial benefit, and the ‘fictéon’ would end in the 


* Till repealed by scire facias. 


LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN. 271 


reality, which all good men desired.” His Lordship then went on to 
explain, and to rely upon, the precedent at the commencement of the 
reign of Henry VI., when the Sovereign, being an infant of nine menths 
old, the Great Seal was placed in his hand, or his hand was placed on 
the Great Seal, and it was supposed to be given by him to the Master 
of the Rolls; whereupon many commissions were sealed by it, and the 
government was carried on under its authority. He concluded by mov- 
ing, ‘‘ That it is expedient and necessary that letters patent for opening 
the Parliament should pass under the Great Seal.”* 

At the request of the Duke of York, Lord Camden agreed that the 
names of the Prince of Wales and of the other Princes . 

4 a, LEB. 3, 1789.] 
of the blood, should be omitted from the commission, 
as they all condemned this mode of proceeding, and the motion was 
carried without a division. Accordingly, on the following day, a com- 
mission, under the Great Seal, was produced in the name of his most 
gracious Majesty George III., by which his Majesty was made to de- 
clare, that “zt not being convenient for him to be personally present, he 
authorized certain Commissioners to open the Parliament in his name, 
and to declare the causes of Parliament being summoned by him.” 
The Commons, attending at the bar of the House of Lords to hear the 
commission read, the Commissioners declared the causes of the sum- 
mons to be, ‘to provide for the care of his Majesty’s royal person, and 
for the administration of the royal authority.” The two Houses did not 
go through the form of agreeing upon an humble address to his Ma- 
jesty, in answer to his gracious speech by his Commissioners ; but the 
Regency Bill was immediately brought in. “The Phantom” did nota 
second time appear to make the bill a law; for, after it had passed the 
Commons, and while it was in Committee in the Lords, it was stopped 
by the King’s convalescence; and George III. remained above twenty 
years on the throne before there was such a recurrence of his malady 
as to render it necessary to resort to similar proceedings.* 

From the course then adopted, and carried through, I presume, it is 
now to be considered part of our constitution, that if -y, ws 
ever, during the natural life of the Sovereign, he is [May By 1789s] 
unable, by mental disease, personally to exercise the royal functions, 
the deficiency is to be supplied by the two Houses of Parliament, who, 
in their diseretion, will probably elect the heir apparent Regent, under 
such restrictions as they may please to propose,—but who may prefer 
the head of the ruling faction, and at once vest in him all the preroga- 
tives of the Crown. On the two occasions referred to in the reign of 
George II[., the next heir being at enmity with the King and his minis- 
ters, this was considered the loyal and courtly doctrine, and from. its 
apparent advancement of the rights of Parliament, there was no diff. 
culty in casting odium upon those who opposed it; but I must avow 
that my deliberate opinion coincides with that of Burke, Fox, and Ers- 
kine, who pronounced it to be unsupported by any precedent, and to be 

* 27 Parl. Hist. 1123-1133, 
t 27 Parl. Hist. 1297. Sce Parl, Deb. xviii. 830, 1102; ante, Vol. I. 


272 REIGN OF GEORGE IIL 


in accordance with the principles of the Polish, not the English, mo- 
narchy. ‘The two Houses of Parliament would be the proper tribunal 
to pronounce that the Sovereign is unable to act; but then, as if he 
were naturally, as well as civilly, dead, the next heir ought, as of right, 
to assume the government as Regent, ever ready to lay it down on the 
Sovereign’s restoration to reason,—in. the same way as our Lady Vic- 
toria would have returned to a private station if, after her accession, 
there had appeared posthumous issue of William IV. by his Queen. It 
is easy to point out possible abuses by the next heir as Regent, to the 
prejudice of the living Sovereign,—but there may be greater abuses of 
the power of election imputed to the two Houses,—whereby a change 
of dynasty might be effected. I conceive, therefore, that the Irish Par- 
liament, in 1789, acted more constitutionally in acknowledging the raght 
of the next heir,—in scouting the fiction of a commission, or. royal 
assent, from the insane Sovereign,—and in addressing the Prince of 
Wales to take upon himself the government as Regent. 

After the King’s recovery Lord Camden adhered (with one memo- 
rable exception) to the resolution he had announced, that, on account 
of his advanced age, he would no longer take part in the debates of the 
House of Lords; but he remained in his office, and steadily supported _ 
the administration by his councils. It has been suggested that, in his 
extended connexion with Mr, Pitt, he abandoned the liberal principles 
for which he had so long struggled. But this charge is, I think, en- 
tirely without foundation. He had been called away to a better state of 
existence before the commencement of the trials for high treason, which 
disgraced the country in the end of the year 1794,—and I am not aware 
of any measure adopted with his sanction which might not have been 
brought forward under Lord Chatham or Lord Rockingham, Bishop 
Watson accuses him of an entire subserviency at this time to the sup- 
posed: illiberal policy of the government. ‘I asked him,” says the 
[a. p, 1790.] Bishop, “if he foresaw any danger likely to result to the 

tert ‘4 Church establishment from the repeal of the Test and 
Corporation acts; he answered at once, ‘none whatever ; Pitt was 
wrong in refusing the application of the Dissenters, but he must now be 
supported.’ ”—I never attach much importance to what is supposed to 
have fallen from any man in the laxity of private talk ; but supposing 
this reminiscence to be quite correct, and that no qualification or cir- 
cumstance to vary the effect is forgotten, might not the President of the 
Council, without sacrificing the Dissenters or his own consistency, hesi- 
tate about breaking up the government on their account, and wait for a 
more favourable opportunity to do them justice? The Bishop might 
have been softened by another anecdote which he relates of Lord 
Camden about the same time: ‘I remember his saying to me one night 
when Lord Chancellor Thurlow was speaking, contrary, as I thought, 
to his conviction, ‘ There now, I could not do that; he is supporting 
what he does not believe a word of.’’’* 


* Bishop Watson’s Memoirs, p. 162. 


LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN. 273 


Lord Camden, like many very sincere and steady friends of liberty, 
was much appalled by the excesses of the French Revolution, and was 
alarmed lest our free institutions, the growth of ages, and the result of 
reason and experience, might be endangered by reckless Jacobin inno- 
vation, Any expressions which he might use while labouring under 
such impressions are not to be nicely weighed for the purpose of making 
out a charge of inconsistency against him. Burke having sent him a 
copy of his ‘‘ Appeal from the new to the old Whigs,” received from 
him the following answer: 


* Brighton, August 5, 1791. 
s* Sir, 

‘“‘] have received with great pleasure your last publication which, as 
it professed to be sent by the author, [ determined to read through with 
the utmost attention, that I might afterwards proportion my thanks to 
the value of the present.* I have done so, and am ready to declare my 
perfect concurrence in every part of the argumeut from the beginning 
to the end, and return you my warmest thanks for presenting me with 
so valuable a performance, though perhaps my acknowledgment of its 
merit may lose some part of its grace by my being an interested party, 
as | am in the success of the doctrine. The commendation of one 
convert (and I have no doubt there will be many) would be a stronger 
testimony of its value than the applause of hundreds that needed no 
conviction, I, for instance, like many others, have always thought 
myself an old Whig, and hold the same principles with yourself; but I 
suppose none, or very few of us, ever thought upon the subject with so 
much correctness, and hardly any would. be able to express their 
thoughts with such clearness, justness, and force of argument. I am 
therefore, as well as them, better instructed how to instruct others than 
I was before. 

‘“‘ There is only one passage in your book that gives me the least 
concern, and that is where you talk of retiring from public business. 
For though, as a member of the administration, | might be well enough 
pleased at the Opposition’s losing one of its ablest assistants, yet [ shall 
be sorry to see the Parliament deprived of so strenuous an advocate for 
the constitution. 

“As an old Whig therefore, and not as a minister, give me leave to 
subscribe myself, 

“Your most obliged and obedient Servant, 
‘« CAMDEN.” 


* I must confess that, for conscience sake, I follow just the opposite rule—always 
returning thanks when I have read the title-page. 


VOL. V. 18 


274 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


CHAPTER CXLVIII. 


CONCLUSION OF THE LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN. 


Lorp Campen showed his sincere and unabated attachment to his 
early political principles by his zealous support of Mr. Fox’s Libel Bill, 
91 which otherwise never would have passed the House of 
aces 272%.) Lords. Near the close of the session of 1791 Thurlow 
ihrew it out, under pretence that there was not time to consider it, but 
not before Lord Camden had made an. admirable speech in its favour, 
showing that the jury were the proper judges of the seditious tendency 
of any writing called a seditious libel. He said,—‘I have long en- 
deavoured to define what is a seditious libel, but have not been able 
to find any definition which either meets the approbation of my own 
mind, or ought to be satisfactory to others. Some Judges have laid 
down that any censure of the government is a libel, Others say, that 
it is only groundless calumnies on government that are to be considered 
libels; but is the Judge to decide as a matter of law whether the accu- 
sation be well or ill founded? You must place the press under the 
power of Judges or Juries, and I think your Lordships will have no 
doubt which to prefer,.”* ; 
In the following year the bill again came up from the Commons, and 
Thurlow did his best to defeat it. He summoned the Judges, and ob- 
[a. p. 1792.] tained from them a unanimous opinion that the question 
ys ‘1 of “libel or no libel?” was one of pure law, for the Court 
alone,—and two law Lords, Lord Bathurst, an Ex-chancellor, and Lord 
Kenyon, the Chief Justice of the King’s Bench, combined with him to 
extinguish the rights of juries. But the veteran champion of those 
rights was undaunted. ‘* Nothing can be more refreshing to the lovers 
of liberty, or more gratifying to those who venerate the judicial cha- 
racter, than to contemplate the glorious struggle for his long-cherished 
principles with which Lord Camden’s illustrious life closed. The fire 
of his youth seemed to kindle in the bosom of one touching on four- 
score, as he was impelled to destroy the servile and inconsistent doc- 
trines of others—slaves to mere technical lore, but void of the sound 
and. discriminating judgment which mainly constitutes a legal—and 
above all a judicial mind.’’*t 
In the memorable debate which decided the fate of the bill,—rising 
[May 16.] eet pines slowly minted difficulty,—still leaning on his 
, he thus began :—‘* I thought never to have troubled 
your Lordships more. The hand of age is upon me, and I have for 
some time felt myself unable to take an active part in your delibera- 
tions. On the present occasion, however, J consider myself as particu- 


* 29 Parl. Hist. 731. + Lord Brougham’s Lives of Statesmen, iii. 178, 


LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN. 275 


larly, or rather as personally, bound to address you—and probably for 
the last time. My opinion on this subject has been long known; it is 
upon record ; it lies on your Lordships’ table ; I shall retain it, and I 
trust I have yet strength to demonstrate that it is consonant to law and 
the constitution.” His voice, which had been at first low and tremu- 
lous, grew firm and loud, and all his physical, as well as mental 
powers, seemed animated and revived. He then stated with his wonted 
precision what the true question was, and he argued it with greater 
spirit than ever. Alluding to his favourite illustration from a trial for 
murder, he said, ‘* A man may kill another in his own defence, or 
under various circumstances, which render the killing no murder. How 
are these things to be explained !—By the circumstances of the case. 
What is the ruling principle?—The intention of the party. Who de- 
cides on the intention of the party? The Judge? No! the jury! So 
the jury are allowed to judge of the intention upon an indictment for 
murder, and not upon an indictment for a libel!!! The jury might as 
well be deprived of the power of judging of the fact of publication, for 
that, likewise, depends upon the ¢xtentzon. What is the oath of the 
jury? Well and truly to try the zsswe jorned—which is the plea of 
not guzty to the whole charge.” In going over the cases, when he 
came to Rex v. Owen, in which he gained such distinction as counsel 
for the defendant, he explained how he had been allowed to address the 
jury, to show the innocence of the alleged libel. ‘* Then,” said he, 
“came Rez v. Shebbeare, where, as Attorney-General, [ conducted the 
prosecution. [ went into court predetermined to insist on the jury 
taking ‘the whole case into their consideration ; and so little did I attend 
to the authority of the Judges, that, in arguing the character of the 
libel, [ turned my back upon them, directing all I had to say to the 
jury-box. In the days of the Charles’s and James’s, the doctrine now 
contended for would have been most precious; it would have served 
as an admirable footstool for tyranny. So clear is it that the jury 
are to decide the question of ‘/zbel or no libel? that if all the 
bench, and all the bar, and the unanimous voice of Parliament, were 
to declare it to be otherwise, I could not change my opinion. I ask 
your. Lordships to say, who shall have the care of the liberty of 
the press? the Judges or the people of England? The jury are 
the people of England. The Judges. are independent men! Be it so, 

But are they totally beyond the possibility of corruption from the 
Crown? Is it impossible to show them favour in any way whatever? 
The truth is, they possibly may be corrupted—juries never can! What 
would be the effect of giving Judges the whole control of the press? 
Nothing would appear that could be disagreeable to the government. 

As well: might an act of Parliament pass, that nothing should be printed 
or published but panegyrics on ministers. Such doctrines being acted 
upon, we should soon lose every thought of freedom. If it is not law, 

it should be made law—that in prosecutions for libel, the Jury shill 
decide upon the whole case. In the full catalogue of crimes, there is 
- not one so fit to be determined by a jury as libel.”’ Before he con- 
cluded, he took an opportunity to pay a just tribute of respect to his old 


276 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


rival, Lord Mansfield, now almost in the tomb, into which he himself 
was so soon to follow him. ‘Though so often opposed to him,” said 
he, ‘I ever honoured his learning and his genius; and if he could be 
present, he would bear witness that personal rancour or animosity never 
mixed with our controversies. When, after this last effort, | shall dis- 
appear, | hope that I, too, may have credit for good intentions with 
those who differ from my opinions, and that perhaps it may be said, 
‘through a long life he was consistent in his desire to serve his country.” 
This speech was warmly complimented by all who followed, on both 
sides, in 2 two-nights’ debate, and gained a majority of 57 to 32 for the 
second reading of the Bill. 

The general expectation was, that it would be allowed to pass silently 
through its subsequent stages; but Thurlow, trying to damage it in 
Committee by a nullifying amendment, Lord Camden was again called 
up, saying, that “* he would contend for the truth of his position as to 

; > the right of juries, in cases of libel, to the last hour 
Lloye 11422] of his existence, mantbus pedibusque.”’ When he 
had reiterated his argument, the amendment was rejected. 

Lord Chancellor.—* | trust the noble and learned Lord will agree to 
a clause being added to the bill, which he will see is' indispensably ne- 
cessary to do. equal justice between the public and those prosecuted for 
libels. This clause will authorize the granting of a new trial, if the 
Court should be dissatisfied with a verdict given for the defendant.” 

Earl Camden.—* What! after a verdict of acquittal ?” 

Lord Chancellor.—* Yes |” 

Earl Camden,.—“ No, | rank vou!!!?* 

These were the last words he ever uttered in public. The bill, in its 
declaratory form, was then suffered to pass through the Committee, and 
to be read a third time; Lords Thurlow, Bathurst, and Kenyon, signing 
a strong protest against it. This is to be honoured as a great example 
of a law Lord boldly declaring and acting upon his own deliberate and 
conscientioas conviction upon a question of law, contrary to the unani- 
mous opinion of the Judges when asked their advice for the assistance 
of the House.—Now that the mist of prejudice has cleared away, I be- 
lieve that English lawyers almost unanimously think that Lord Cam- 

“den’s view of the question was correct on strict legal principles; and 
that the act was properly made to dec/are the right of the jury to deter- 
mine upon the character of the alleged libel, instead of enacting it as 
an Innovation. 

No law ever operated more beneficially than that which had been so 
long and so violently opposed by legal! dignitaries. It put an end to the 
indecent struggle in trials for libel between the Judge and the jury, 
which had agitated courts of justice near a century ; it placed the liberty 
of the press on a secure basis; all the predictions that it would encourage 
seditious publications and attacks on private character have been falsi- 
fied ; and we have now the best definition of a libel—‘*a publication 


* 29 Parl. Hist. 1404-1534. 


LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN. 277 


which, in the opinion of twelve honest, independent, and intelligent men, 
is mischievous and ought to be punished.” The bill bears the name of 
Mr. Fox, because he introduced it into the House of Commons, while 
the merit of it is claimed by the admirers of Erskine, on account of his 
glorious fight for the rights of juries in the case of the Dean of St. 
Asaph; but Pratt had struggled successfully for its principle long before 
these names were ever heard of, and to him we must ascribe its final 
triumph.* His perseverance is the more meritorious, as he might have 
had a plausible pretext for taking a contrary course from the multipli- 
cation of seditious writings, and the democratic movement then sup- 
posed to threaten the public tranquillity ; but he wisely thought that 
the vessel of the state is best prepared to encounter a storm by making 
a jettison of abuses, 

Lord Camden survived two years. Although his mental faculties 
remained unimpaired, he did not again appear before the public. He 
wished to have resigned his office, but it was not convenient that a 
vacancy should be made in the cabinet, and ‘the King claimed a con- 
tinuation of his services while he was so well able to perform them.” 
Every possible indulgence was shown him. Cabinets were often held 
at his house; and draughts of deliberation were sent to him into the 
country, where he now for the most part resided. 

His private friendships continued to be cherished with unabated 
ardour. Thus, a few weeks before his death, he ad- fs 
dressed the Duke of Grafton: bie Wi abe se 

‘| am more restored than [ ever expected to be, and if ] can combat 
this winter, perhaps may recover so much strength as to pass the re- 
mainder of my days with cheerfulness: but I do not believe it possible 
ever for me to return to business, and | think your Grace will never see 
me again at the head of the Council Board. It is high time for me to 
become a private man and retire. But, whatever may be my future 
condition, whether in or out of office, I shall remain with the same re- 
spect and attention, 

“Your Grace’s most faithful Friend,” &c. 


Finding his health seriously affected by the severity of the season, 
he soon after removed from Camden Place, in Kent, to his town resi- 
dence in Hill Street, Berkeley Square. Here he gradually sunk, more 
through the gentle pressure of time than any particular disorder. He 
quietly breathed his last on the 13th of April, 1794, in the eighty-first 
year of his age,—exactly thirteen months after the decease of his great 
rival, Lord Mansfield, who had attained the more venerable age of 
eighty-nine. 

His remains were deposited in the family vault, in the parish church 
of Seal, in Kent. A monument has there been erected to his memory, 
with an epitaph, which, after stating his age and the various offices he 


* It is said that Lord Camden had prepared the draught of Mr. Fox’s Libel Bill 
many years before, but kept it back till he saw there was a chance of carrying it.— 
Europ. Mag. Aug. 1794, p. 93. 


278 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


held, thus concludes in language which, though dictated by the piety 
of an affectionate son, posterity will re-echo. H 

“ Endowed with abilities of the highest order, with learning deep and extensive, « 
with taste discriminating and correct, with talents in society most instructive and 
agreeable, and with integrity universally acknowledged, he lived beloved by his 
family and friends, respected and venerated by his country, and died universally 
‘regretted by all good men.” 


Among all the Chancellors whose lives [ have written, or who are 
yet in prospect before me, there is no one whose virtues have been more 
highly estimated than Lord Camden’s. We may conceive how he was 
regarded in his own age, from the character of him by Horace Wal- 
pole, ever anxious, by sarcasms and sneers, to lower even those whom 
he professed to exalt. ‘‘ Mansfield had a bitter antagonist in Pratt, who 
was steady, warm, sullen, stained with no reproach, and a uniform 
Whig. Nor should we deem less highly of him because private mo- 
tives stirred him on to the contest. Alas! how cold would public virtue 
be if it never glowed but with public heat! So seldom, too, it is that 
any considerations can bias a man to run counter to the colour of his 
office, and the interests of his profession, that the world should not be 
too scrupulous about accepting the service as a merit, but should honour 
it at least for the sake of the precedent.” 

A contemporary writer says :—‘* He was blessed by nature with a 
clear, persuasive, and satisfactory manner of conveying his ideas. In 
the midst of politeness and facility, he kept up the true dignity of his 
important office; in the midst of exemplary patience, (foreign to his 
natural temper, and therefore the more commendable,) his understand- 
ing was always vigilant. His memory was prodigious in readiness and 
comprehension ; but, above all, there appeared a kind of benevolent 
solicitude for the discovery of truth, that won the suitors to a thorough 
and implicit confidence in him.”* 

I find nothing hinted against hinyas a Judge, except “that he was a 
little too prolix in the reason of his decrees, by taking notice even of 
inferior circumstances, and viewing the question in every conceivable 
light.” The same objector adds :—*‘ This, however, was an error on 
the right side, and arose from his wish to satisfy the bar, and his own 
mind, which’ was, perhaps, to a weakness, dissatisfied with its first im- 
pressions, however strong.”+ Both as an Equity and Common Law 
Judge, his authority continues to be held in reverence by the profession, 

As a politician, he is to be held up asa bright example of consistency 
and true patriotism to all future generations of English lawyers, and 
the high honours which he reached should counteract the demoralizing 
effect of the success which has too often attended tergiversation and 
profligacy,—when these calculations are aided by the recollection that 


* Almon’s Anecdotes, vol. i. p. 384. 

+ Another grave charge brought against him was that “he wore a tie wig in 
Court instead of a full bottom, and that he had been frequently observed to garter 
up his stockings while the counsel were most strenuous in their eloquence,”— 
Almon’s Anecdotes, vol. i. 384. 


LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN. 279 


such success, however brilliant, will neither secure permanent admira- 
tion nor real happiness. 

Lord Camden’s eloquence is not free from tinsel—but still it is cha- 
racterized by sterling vigour of thought, richness of imagery, and feli- 
city of diction, Like most great English lawyers, and unlike most 
great French and Scotch lawyers, he never aimed at literary distinction. 
His only known printed production was ‘ An Inquiry into the Process 
of Latitat in Wales.” But he had a great taste for reading, which did 
not confine itself to legal and antiquarian lore. It is said that through- 
out life he was a devourer of romances, including the interminable 
tomes of Scuderi,—and that the ‘Grand Cyrus” and ‘+ Philidaspes” 
furnished him many an evening’s repast, for which his appetite was 
sharpened by the juridical labours which had occupied the morning. 
In his youth, he followed the example of Lord Chancellor North in de- 
voting himself, as a relaxation from study, to music,—in which he 
seems to have made great proficiency ; for, his friend Davies planning 
an opera to be set to music by Handel, we find him offering to assist 
with his advice respecting the genius of musical verse, the length of the 
performance, the numbers and talent of the singers, and the position 
of the chorusses—in the language of an accomplished adept in the 
science of harmony. 

He was not a member (I should have been glad to have recorded that 
he was) of ‘the Literary Club,’ and he never seems to have been in- 
timate with Johnson or Goldsmith, or any of the distinguished authors 
of his day. ‘* Goldsmith, in his diverting simplicity, ‘complained one 
day, in a mixed company, of Lord Camden. ‘ £ met him,’ said he, ¢ at 
Lord Clare’s house in the country, and he took no more notice of me 
than if I had been an ordinary man. The company having laughed 
heartily, Johnson stood forth in defence of his friend. ‘ Nay, gentle- 
men, said he,‘ Dr. Goldsmith ts in the right. A nobleman ought to 
have made up to such a man as Goldsmith, and I think it 1s much 
against Lord Camden that he neglected him.’”*—However, we learn 
likewise from the inimitable Boswell that Lord Camden was on a footing 
of great familiarity with -him ‘“‘ whose death eclipsed the gaiety of na- 
tions.” ‘J told him,” says this prince of biographers, ‘that one 
morning when I went to breakfast with Garrick, who was very vain of 
his intimacy with Lord Camden, he accosted me thus: ‘ Pray now did 
tone you meet a little lawyer turning the corner, eh?’ ‘No sir, 
said I, * Pray what do you mean by the question?’ ‘* Why,’ replied 
Garrick, with an affected indifference, yet as standing on tip-toe, ‘ Lord 
Camden has this moment left me. We have hada long walk together? 
‘Jonnson. Well, sir, Garrick talked very properly, Lord Camden 
WAS O LITTLE LAWYER fo be associating so familiarly with a player.” t 
—But in another mood Johnson ould have highly and deservedly 
praised the LITTLE LAwyeER for relishing the society of a man who was 


* Bosw. Life of Johnson, iii. 336. t Ib. 


280 REIGN OF GEORGE IIl. 


a most agreeable companion, and of high intellectual accomplishments, 
as well as the greatest actor who ever trod the English stage, 

Lord Camden is said to have been somewhat of an Epicurean—in- 
disposed towards exertion, bodily or mental, unless when roused to it 
by the necessity of business or the excitement of strong feeling ;—and 
to have taken considerable pains in supplying his tarder and his cellar 
with all that could best furnish forth an exquisite banquet. It is cer- 
tain that he was himself always extremely temperate, forming a con- 
trast in this and other particulars with his immediate predecessor on the 
woolsack,—for his conversation was ever polished and decorous. He 
seems to have been most amiable in private life, and to have had ina 
distinguished degree, 





“that which should accompany old age— 
Honour, love, obedience, troops of friends.” 


With many political opponents, he was without a personal enemy. 

Lord Camden was in stature below the middle size, but well propor- 
tioned and active. We have several exquisite portraits of him. That 
painted for the City of London, by Reynolds, is one of the finest speci- 
mens of the English school. Judging from these, his physiognomy, 
without marked features or deep lines, was more expressive of gentle- 
ness of disposition and frank good-humour than of profound thoughtful- 
ness or stern resolution. 

With the exception of an occasional slight fit of the gout, he enjoyed 
uninterrupted health. He had never had the smallpox, and it is related 
of him, as a weakness, that he was always much afraid of taking that 
disorder—his terrors being greatly aggravated when his friend, Lord 
Waldegrave, died of it at the age of fifty.* 

He left a son, John Jeffreys, who, in 1812, was created Marquis 
Camden and Earl of Brecknock, and who was not only distinguished 
for his public services, but for the disinterested renunciation of the legal 
profits of his tellership beyond a very limited amount,—to the great be- 
nefit of the public revenue. 

Lord Chancellor Camden is now represented by his grandson, the 
present Marquis, who out of respect for his own virtues, and for the me- 
mory of his ancestors, has been decorated with the garter which his 
father wore.t 


* Nich, Lit. An, viii, 533. + Grandeur of the Law, 27. 


APPENDIX 


TO 


THE LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN. 


Ir has. often been stated that George Hardinge, the Welsh Judge, who was a 
nephew of Lord Chancellor Camden, had written a Life of that great man, and 
collected for publication his speeches and judgments. While the preceding Memoir 
was going through the press, the present Marquis Camden has discovered, and 
kindly communicated to me, all that had been accomplished, or at least all that 
remains of this undertaking. The very lively and ingenious, but rather eccentric 
and irregular, George Hardinge, famous for his solution of the American question, 
by showing that “all Americans were represented in Parliament by the members 
for Kent, the lands of the United States being held of the Crown as of the Manor of 
Greenwich,”—had seriously entered on this task, and had composed a “ Table of 
Contents” from which he was to begin the work, and likewise a “ Preface,” as if he 
had finished it. These I give in extenso, and they will be found very curious. As 
to completing his plan, he seems to have proceeded raptim et sparsim. But several 
detached parts of the work which I subjoin are exceedingly graphic and interesting, 
and I strongly recommend them to the notice of the reader.—The judgment. in 
Shipley’s case, though perhaps rather too highly praised, is likewise well deserving 
of perusal. 


“ ConTENTs.” 


“ Lord Camden’s birth, 
State of his father’s age. 
and repute—at the time. 
his father’s death. 
— his entrance into Eton College. 
his election into King’s College. 
formed his classical taste at these two colleges. 
It never changed. 
The character of it in his eloquence, 
and in his pen— 
—an elegant simplicity. 
The accident at King’s which gave birth 
to the orcs ee tof his life, 
He found a party of Whigs? 
leagued in a deadly feud § pani det, Tories. 
My father at the head of it. They adopted him into their Cabinet. 
His memorable words to me upon this topic. 
Whig and Tory defined and distinguished. 
Not a hard student—but rather a cursory than a superficial reader. He 
read with genius. 
applied with reluctance to the law. 
fond of convivial habits and convivial talents. 
—— but abstaining from vice. 
read, as before, at broken intervals. 
early and late made a rule of turning rules into their principles. 
formed an acquaintance 
with Hawkins Brown 
and with Henry Fielding. 





























282 LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN (APPENDIX). 


Short character of both as given by him. 
became intimate with Lord Northington, who took a fancy to him. 
called to the bar. 
very little business. 
hated it. 
was often going to leave it. 
Davis’s poem to him-—prophetic. 
Western Circuit. 
writes a Law Essay in 1745. 
A most ingenious performance—recovered and republished by me. 
1752. Writes a pamphlet in favour of the Jew Bill—a very admirable work. 
—— upon the Western Circuit recommended and pushed by Lord Northington.* 
—— made a King’s Counsel. 
—— acquired great fame in Oxfordshire election. 
—— high in repute. 
tempted into the Court of Chancery, at a risk. 
Lord Hardwicke used him ill. 
would not hear him. 
in 1757 upon the verge of ruin (from this ill treatment), 
—— rescued by two miracles: 
1. The resignation of Lord Hardwicke. 
2. Lord Chatham’s passion for him, 
his veneration for Lord Hardwicke. 
The visit paid by Lord Chatham. 
opens all his great principles. 
They agree. 
makes him his Attorney-General. 
puts him over Charles Yorke’s. head. 
Lord Chatham’s character described. 
Lord C.’s principles 
and his conduct as 
instances of his integrity. 
of his high spirit. 
and zeal for liberty. 
—— his memorable exertions to improve the Habeas Corpus.t 
—— his declaration that the jury were judges of the libel— 
—— before Ld. M4. who held the opposite opinion, but surrendered it in fact, 
though not in words, upon the next occasion. 
His character of Lord Mansfield. : 
King’s death. 
Tories come in. 
He is made C. Justice by foree—his words upon it. 


The good fortune of that change, and its wonderful effect upon his future cha- 
racter.§ 












































t Attorney-General.t 











would have been lost under the shade of Lord Chatham but for this. 
Wilkes and general warrants.|] 

Lord C»’s abilities and courage. 

his judgment on the seizure of papers. 

—— his argument in the house of Peers on a famous cause. 

conflict between Lord Hardwicke and him. 

— character of Judge Gould. 

gives judgment upon a very curious point against Lord M4, 

—— his opinion as to General Warrants—confirmed at last by Ld. M4. himself. 
—— his refusal to give new trials, and the consistency of it proved. 
—— a popular character—Freedoms and gold boxes.1 

—— made a Peer by the Rockinghams. 

—— whence not partial to Lord Chatham. 











* This is the earliest part of the MS. which has been preserved. 
t p. 285. } p. 285. § p. 286. || p. 286. T p. 286. 


LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN (APPENDIX). 283 


The Rockinghams not very partial to Lord Chatham or to the new Peer. 
His peerage was adopted by him as a popular measure. 
His eloquence and spirit upon the right of taxing America—which he disputes in 
two capital speeches. 
One of them recovered, and published by me. 
He detects Lord Mansfield 
in a fiction. 
He continues to support the Americans. He never deserts them. 
Lord Chatham’s letter to him. 
He is made Chancellor. 
His personal regard for the Duke of Grafton. 
It never is impaired. 
His début from the woolsack inauspicious.* 
He is for a time the victim of obloquy, 
incited and goaded against him 
by Lord Temple. 
His character and conduct as Chancellor in his Court.t 
His judgment in Shipley’s appeal—one of the noblest compositions in the world. 
His eloquent speech upon the East India dividend. 
His éloge upon Dunning. 
Dunning’s character.t 
Ld. C*’s wonderful display of talent in the Douglas cause.§ 
His memory, acuteness, and judicial powers at the height. 
His éloge upon Lord Mansfield in the case of Dissenters. 
His bar.|! 
Character of Lord Walsingham: 
His decrees, 
Consummate performances. 
His opinion of Sir E. Wilmot. 
His character and style of speaking. 
His reprimand of a culprit forced upon him at the bar of the Lords. 
—w— turns himself out upon the Midd. election. 
— — becomes a powerful champion for America. 
His eloquence and abilities on the subject of literary property. 
1772. Another attack upon Lord M4. as to the right of juries over the libel. 
—— a debate upon it in the House of Commons. Lord M‘, victorious. 
Ld. Chatham’s death. 
American independence, 
Lord C*’s warning voice neglected, 
till it was too late. 
His great powers upon Fox’s India Bill. 
Made Pres' of the Council. 
His opinion of Lord Lansdown. 
—— resigns. 
—— made Prest of the Council again. 
His opinion of Mr. Pitt. 
His wonderful powers at the Board of Privy Council. 
His good fortune as to the rights of Juries. 
His opinion sanctioned by the Legislature. 
At the age of 77 he makes as brilliant a speech as ever he made in his life in 
support of the bill. : 
His able statement of the Regency measures. 
His decay and last illness. 
— his change of political seutiments. 


/ 


* This alludes to the legality of infringing an act of Parliament and the “ forty 
days’ tyranny.” 
Tt p. 287. t p. 287. § p, 288. I] p. 288, 





284 LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN (APPENDIX). 


— his opinion respecting Dumourier. 
Sketch of his domestic life and character.* 





“ PREFACE, 


“Personal gratitude and personal affection to the Good and Great who have 
closed their scene upon earth, are elevated sentiments. They are debts of honour to 
the departed spirit. 

“ But there is a third party in the contrast whose claim is imperious upon attach- 
ments like these. A public interest is at stake in the example, and calls upon the 
historian, who had the most familiar access to it, for a living resemblance to the cha- 
racter of the portrait. 

“There is a delicacy and pride in esteem when challenged by the eloquent appeal 
of departed genius and virtue. Nothing is more injurious to its honour than a lavish 
intemperance of praise. 

“But a delight in calling back to the world a favourite character may surely be 
indulged without prejudice to the discipline of conscience and of religious truth. 
For ‘ what is true fame’ (to borrow an image from the most eloquent of men) ‘ but in 
the consenting judgment of honest men? It is their answer to virtue, and like that 
of an echo to the voice, it is animated by the impression it repeats.’ 

“To this memorial of Earl Camden’s life I am impelled by two co-operating 
motives—by a sense of love to him, and by a demand of the public interest. Aware 
of my own peril in the effort, I overcome the fear, and sustain it by a reflection that 
I could not, as an honest man, decline a task imposed by the union of two such 
claims upon me. 

“'This favourite of his country and of its proudest honours, conferred upon me 
good offices of a nature truly parental. He conferred them with all the generous 
prejudices and vigilant attentions of the duty thus adopted and self-imposed. 

“ But in course of time his predilections ripened into confidence. He indulged 
me with his familiar habits. 

“ Upon most of the leading events in his powerful career through the world, he 
unveiled himself to me with all that simplicity of character which formed so en- 
gaging a part of his nature. 

“ Fle was a man who hated falsehood, and who had contempt for the miscalcu- 
lated vanity of self-importance. 

“The notices therefore imparted by him to me are so far memorable that in them 
is to be found the whisper (if it must not be called a soliloquy) of a discerning and 
most ingenuous mind overheard in the bosom of retirement.” 


FRaGMENTs OF THE Lire or Lorp CampEn, By George HarpincE, 


“ At an early period he formed an acquaintance, and friendly as well as pleasant 
interconrse, with Mr. Henley, afterwards Earl of Northington, who, as I often heard 
him say, was the most practical and generous friend of his youthful ambition— 
recommended him upon the circuit when he was at the head of it, and upon one 
occasion transferred all his briefs to him, either disabled by illness, or called away 
for some higher demand upon his professional talents. It has been told another way— 
that all the eminent counsel had been pre-engaged on one side, and that upon a 
complaint by the adversaries to Mr. Henley, who had the lead, he said, ‘ Why don’t 
you go to young Pratt?’ ‘ Who is he?’ cried the attorney. ‘ What signifies who he 
is? take him,’ said Henley, ‘and see what you can make of him.’ I never heard 
him state the particulars from him, as he had a contempt for such anecdotes; but he 
has in general told me that he was for a long time very poor, very obscure, and very 
little employed.” 

He never derived the least advantage from the distinguished repute of his father. 
“Tt was not worth a guinea to me, that I can recollect,” were his own words. 





* It is very gratifying to me to find that my Memoir omits so few of the topics 
above enumerated, and that George Hardinge, as far as he goes, corroborates my 
‘statements. 





LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN (APPENDIX). 285 


“From the time he was thoroughly known, his advancement at the bar was rapid. 
He was counsel in the Chippenham election, which gave a deathblow to Sir Robert 
Walpole as the Minister; and Lord C. often described the political incidents which 
accompanicd that event in a very entertaining manner. 

“ His opinion was congenial to that of Milton, as an advocate for the unlicensed 
press; and that Government should see how they demeaned themselves.” 

After referring to the bill to amend the Habeas Corpus act, introduced in 1758, 
the author says: “the Attorney-General, who had prompted this measure, voted 
and spoke as an advocate, for its reception, with eloquence and spirit. ‘The bill was 
rejected in the House of Peers. Proud was the day for Britain which attested the 
unexampled phenomenon of the Minister and of his Attorney-General holding up and 
spreading their shield over the rights of the subject against even a contingent abuse 
of the executive power, in opposition to a majority of the Cabinet. I am not aware 
that, except on this one occasion, he ever spoke in the House of Commons; and I 
know his opinion to be, that an Attorney-General ought rather to be reserved than 
forward in political debates, unless where great principles of the constitution are 
implicated.” 

In giving the history of the passing of the Libel Bill, he says: “I shall never 
cease to lament that I did not personally hear this parting voice of his gifted and 
superior mind. But I perfectly remember that, before the bill passed, I was in the 
House of Peers when Lord ‘Thurlow (no every-day’s adversary) asked of him, from 
the woolsack to agree to some amendment in the title or preamble of the bill, His 
answer was in perfect good-humour, ‘No, I thank you, my Lord. You may con- 
quer me, if you can; but [ will never capitulate. ‘Intentum animum tanquam 
arcum habuit; nec senectuti succubuit.’ I remember that when the question was 
put, Lord Thurlow said, ‘I am afraid the Contents have it.’ 

“One salutary consequence has followed from the bill. Instead of a disgraceful 
squabble and captious warfare between the Judge and the juries, they have gone 
hand in hand for the punishment of libellers.” 

“TI have heard Lord Camden say, that he felt himself responsible, in the office of 
Attorney-General to the public as well as to the Ministers, and that he never prose. 
cuted, or countermanded prosecution, er signed a warrant, if it was not the act of 
his own advice and judgment, by which he was ready and willing to abide, instead 
of throwing it off, and shifting it upon the Government; that he interposed himself 
as a judicial officer between the executive Government and the subject; that he 
acted as a kind of referee, accountable to both parties, by a tacit compact, for a 
sound and virtuous exercise of discretion; that he had made this point with Lord 
Chatham at their first interview; that he commended him for making it, and 
assured him of support, adding these memorable words; ‘ You shall not fight single- 
handed,’ 

“‘ He refused obedience to the warrant from the Board of Treasury, directing him 
to countermand farther prosecution. He wrote his ground of refusal. He told 
them, he was not apprised by the warrant either of their grounds for prosecuting, 
or of the reasons which had induced them to be more lenient; that he could not, 
therefore, act blindfolded, but that, as it happened he had a very accurate knowledge 
of their ground for prosecuting, because it was impressed upon them by him that 
the defendant had since been convicted, by two verdicts, of a dangerous fraud on the 
Government; that he could not therefore, in coriscience, give to such a convict the 
charter of impunity which they had prompted. He took the opportunity of remind- 
ing them, with spirit and with dignity, that he was answerable to the public, as 
well as to his conscience, for the due execution of a judicial trust imposed upon him 
by his patent. ‘The Poard, at first enraged, had the good sense and the manliness, 
atter cool reflection, to confess themselves in the wrong, and to reclaim the letter, 
so that it should not appear against them.” 

“When Lord Ferrers was tried, in Westminster Hall, before his peers, for murder, 
Mr. Pratt’s laminous and pertinent manner of stating the material facts were so 
distinguished, that I heard many excellent judges of legal eloquence call that work 
(for it is in print as he delivered it), a masterpiece of its kind. His cross-examina- 
tion upon the topic of insanity was judicious, acute, and impressive. I remember 
the effect, as it were yesterday, when he said, ‘ Had the noble prisoner at the bar a 


286 LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN (APPENDIX). 


power of distinguishing, as a moral agent, between right and wrong, or was he 
ignorant, in your opinion, that murder was an offence to God as well as man?’ 

“ His talents, however, as an advocate, brilliant as they were of their kind, in the 
Court of Chancery, at the Board of Privy Council, and in appeals to the House of 
Lords, fell very short of those for which he was reserved upon the Bench, and which 
he had soon the opportunity of displaying, for the public advantage, in a degree 
which no time can obliterate.” 

“He has often told me, that in the Court of Chancery multitudes would flock to 
hear Lord Hardwicke as to hear Garrick; that his clearness of arrangement and 
comprehension of the subject were masterly, but that his address (and he laid 
emphasis upon the word), in the turn which he gave to all, whether he was in the 
right, or was to ‘make the worse appear the better reason,’ was like magic. 

“ IT never heard Lord Camden speak of Lord Mansfield in terms of asperity, or 
without a general praise of his wonderful talents.” 

“In a few months after the King’s death, Lord Bute superseded the Attorney 
General in that office, and raised him against his will, but it was Hobson’s choice 
to a vacant seat on the bench as Chief Justice of the Common Pleas. I have heard 
him say that he paused again and again, before he accepted this judicial office, 
though it was intimated that he was, at all events, to be no longer Attorney-General, 
It was happy for the public, and for hin, that he was over-persuaded by his friends 
to become a judicial man. Lord Bute had no good will to him in this arrangement. 
He was no friend of the Whigs, or of such an Attorney-General. His object was 
(and it was, apparently, no improvident calculation) to lay him upon the shelf for the 
remainder of his life. ‘The new Chief Justice marked at once the philosophy and 
good humour of despair :—‘I am a figure,’ said he, ‘ put into that niche in the halls, 
and am never to leave it.’ At another time he said, he was an old family picture 
out of fashion, and carried up stairs by force into the garret. But what are human 
calculations? The new Chief Justice of the Common Pleas was a short-sighted 
prophet as well as Lord Bute.” 

‘“« His judgment upon the ever-memorable case of Mr. Wilkes, in all its numerous 
branches, evinced consummate ability, a discriminating acuteness of intellect, and 
that commanding simplicity of character which never deserted him. Being at 
Cambridge, I could not hear his speech on Wilkes’s liberation, and being impatient 
to read it, one of the Chief Justice’s admirers and friends said, ‘ Your academical 
conceit will be disappointed. ‘There are no flowers in it. No Tully. No Demos. 
thenes. It is very sound law—but as dry as a bone!’ 

“ He had freedoms in gold boxes, and sat for his picture in Guildhall. Itisa 
whimsical fact that Samuel Johnson, the most avowed and flaming Tory of his age, 
wrote the Latin inscription, which is at the foot of the picture. 

“ Among the obloquies of the day, it was broadly asserted that Mr. Pitt and his 
Chief Justice degraded.themselves by adopting Mr. Wilkes; and likewise that Lord 
Camden had never seen him in his life till he saw him in his own Court of Common 
Pleas, and that he had no personal intercourse with him. 1 know, likewise, that 
neither he nor Mr. Pitt were the favourites of that incendiary. Upon some occasion 
Mr. Pitt called him the libeller of the King, and blasphemer of his God—which, as 
being truths very unpolished, he never could forgive. As for Lord Camden, I can 
vouch for it, and shall not overlook it in the picture of his domestic life—that no 
man ever breathed who had such an abhorrence of obscenity, or of an improper 
liberty with sacred names.” 

“I never saw him administer criminal justice, but I am told that he was remark- 
ably humane, feeling, and compassionate. I remember that he thought Lord Hard. 
wicke’s Act, which made forgery capital, too severe, and that he often said, ‘no 
policy could reconcile him to it,)—adding, however, that ‘he was, perhaps, in fault, 
but that he could not help it.’ 

“JT have known him often uneasy under the impression that he had misconceived 
a fact or an argument. I observe that, in the Court of Common Pleas, he has more 
than once confest himself in the wrong. It will be found that in the House of 
Peers, in the debate on the American tax, he alludes to these habits of his judicial 
conduct in a very modest and graceful manner.” 

“It may seem unmanly and frivolous to lay stress upon it, but he possessed the 


| 


1 





LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN (APPENDIX). 287 


manners of a perfect gentleman, both at the bar and upon the bench, in a degree 
and with an effect that elevated them into ornaments of a superior mind.” 

“In plantation appeals he gave equal satisfaction, and his memory of the facts at 
issue in so advanced a period of his life, could with difficulty be imagined, unless by 
those who attested the miracle. In causes of a mixed nature from Guernsey and 
Jersey, his temper, address, and zeal for the good will of those islands to this country, 
without offence to judicial conclusions, were infinitely meritorious and most critically 
useful.” 

“He delivered in the House of Peers all the regulations (in their successive 
details) of the intended Regency, and stated them with energy of mind unimpaired 
—though in a single instance he was oppressed by an attack made upon him on a 
topic in which it was alleged his opinion was unconstitutional, viz., as to the power 
of creating peers, which he had represented, and with perfect accuracy, to have been 
vested heretofore in Parliament. Worn out by the conflict, in a fit of low spirits, 
he confessed the indiscretion, and threw himself upon the mercy of his opponents.” 

“ Lord Shelburne’s character is too well known to demand any analysis of it, and 
I have only to observe that, with all his peculiarities, Lord Camden admired his 
debating powers above those of any other peer in his time, Lord Chatham alone 
excepted,” 

“Lord Camden recommended Mr. Dunning to the office of Solicitor-General. 
From that period, as long as he remained at the bar, he bad more business than 
ever fell to the share of any other individual; and I am free to confess more than 
he should have assumed his power to execute, for to my personal knowledge he 
often held briefs upon the faith of his attendance, and of his argument, both which 
he entirely withheld from his client without pleading an excuse for it, and much 
less returning his fee. This habit was emulated by others, and became an air of 
those who acquired celebrity at the bar—but no fashion can justify it. If one could 
ever say in what part of Mr. Dunning’s professional merit as an advocate his pre-emi- 
nence over others was the most conspicuous, that problem would, perhaps, be solved— 
at his chambers. I remember a very marked instance of the homage then paid him 
by no common man, Lord Thurlow, when Attorney-General. I had consulted the 
latter on a subject of law which bore upon my own personal interest. He invited me 
to dinner, and gave me his opinion at his table; but having given it, he said, ‘ Let 
us go to Dunning; he will set us right in half a minute.’ ‘The remark was pro- 
phetic as well as candid and liberal.” 

“Tt is not a little singular that Lord Camden’s outset in the House of Pecrs, after 
he became Chancellor, and his last words before he left the woolsack, never to be 
seated upon it again, were equally unfortunate. In the course of the debate, in 
which he maintained ‘ that expulsion from the House of Commons did not, by the 
law of Parliament, incapacitate the member so expelled at a future election,’ Lord 
Chatham, who had left the administration, represented him with indiscretion at 
least, if not with indelicacy, as having declared the same opinion privately to him, 
when he had not in fact given his colleagues in the cabinet any direct information 
of it, although all of them perfectly knew it. This exposed him to a very animated, 
forcible, and popular attack upon him. His friend the Duke of Grafton was peevish 
in his reply, and they parted in that House with a semblance of mutual asperity. 

“‘] was present when he took his seat as Chancellor in Lincoln’s Inn Hall, and 
was not a little surprised, but more than a little pleased, at his readiness in deciding 
off hand upon the variety of motions which he heard upon what is called ‘a Seal 
Day,’ though he had left the Court for some years. It seemed as if he had been in 
the daily and recent habit of attention to its rules. 

“ He found a bar elevated in its character for talents and learning. Mr. Yorke 
was at the head of it. Mr. De Grey, the new Attorney-General, had begun to feel 
his ground firm as a rock under him, and Lord Rosslyn, then Mr. Wedderburn, 
gave powerful hints of that brilliant eloquence that was in future to make him so 
distinguished a figure at the bar and in the House of Commons. 

“« None have denied that Lord Camden filled the judicial province of this new de- 
partment, so as to unite all the suitors of this Court, and all others in one opinion 


_ concerning him—that superior talents for that seat had never fallen to the share of 
“any man except Lord Hardwicke, who had so wonderfully enlightened the Court 


288 LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN (APPENDIX). 


by his judicial experience and penetration. Lord Camden’s judgment, like that of 
his model, was uncommonly sound, and his mode of delivering his opinion persua- 
sive: his apprehension quick, and his explanation of the subject luminous, But no 
Judge, on the other hand, had less conceit of his own undisciplined opinion against 
the weight of precedents fixed and settled. He likewise avoided the practice of re- 
pealing acts of Parliament by judicial construction, saying, that ‘he could not be 
more or less enlightened or liberal than his lawgiver had enabled him to be.’—Un- 
fortunately he seldom wrote his judgments, so that few of them are extant as com- 
positions.” 

“ He took notes more from habit or from diffidence than from necessity; but he 
often dispensed with his notes, statimg facts with as much accuracy as if he had 
read what he had written. At the Privy Council, I have known him often go through a 
cause which had numerous and complicated facts without a note of the arguments 
delivered by the counsel, and with no written preparation of any kind—with a force 
and perspicuity almost inconceivable. In the Downing cause he adopted a course 
I never saw taken by others in my life. Upon some of the topics he read what he 
had written from his paper—for others he depended on memory alone—and leading 
them into his MS., he took it up again—then left it again—without embarrassment 
of any kind. 

“ But I have now to relate what must appear to those who have read that volu- 
minous and complicated romance, the Douglas cause, more an experiment upon 
credulous minds than a miracle which evidence can attest. I had an office under 
him, and I attended him in his coach to the House of Lords. He was then Chan- 
eellor. Though I knew him to be anxious, I never had seen him so tremulous and 
flurried. He was afraid of the demand upon him, which fear he told me had in- 
duead him to write, not the whole of his argument, but the heads of it. He had 
shown them to me in his own hand, fairly written, upon seven or eight pages of 
folio paper. He said that he was afraid of not using them, and was afraid of using 
them too—but as it was not his habit—in such an assembly to look at a paper it 
should throw his thoughts into confusion. When he began to address the House, 
my attention was fixed upon this paper which he had rolled up. Not having at 
first any other occasion for it, he waved it as a kind of truncheon. From one topic 
he was led on to another, and through a very long as well as able and impressive 
argument he never unfolded that paper, nor was at a loss for a single fact. Lord 
Mansfield, who followed him, spoke from notes, and consulted them withont 
reserve.” 


Lorp CampeEn’s JupGMENT IN Suip.eEy’s Case. 


Of the collections which George Hardinge had made of his uncle’s speeches, 
&c., there is only preserved his “judgment in Shipley’s appeal,” characterized by 
him as ‘“ one of the noblest compositions in the world.” The case has lost much of 
its interest, and the details of it would now be tiresome ; but some passages from it 
must ever be read with delight and instruction. 

The appellant, a young man at the University, had been expelled from his college 
for the supposed offence of publishing a libel, aggravated, as his accusers and judges 
chose to say, by his being guilty of “general immorality.’ The college being a 
royal foundation, he appealed to the King, as visiter. ‘The appeal was heard by the 
Lord Chancellor, who, in giving judgment, thus began: 

“This jurisdiction is exercised in the right of the King, as visiter. It is, in its 
nature, very peculiar. It is a despotism uncontrolled, and without appeal ; the only 
one of the kind which is known in this kingdom, 

“T contemplate with pleasure so numerous an assembly, as there is no restraint 
upon the visiter but his own character. ; 

“Tam called upon to annul, to alter, or to sustain, the sentence passed on Mr. 
Shipley, the appellant. Tt is a judgment against this young man, which carries in 
it a most heavy accusation. It not only convicts him of the first charge, but adds 
to it a character of ‘ general immorality,’ 

“ Mr. Shipley, in his appeal, relies on three objections:—1. That the proceeding 





LIFE OF LORD CAMDEN (APPENDIX). 289 


against him has been irregular. 2. That the proof was insufficient. 3. That the 
punishment is excessive, ; 

“ As to the first point, he says that he was not duly charged; that he had not a 
fair hearing, and that he was not suffered by his accusers to adduce evidence in his 
defence, I shall not proceed in this case as in appeals from an inferior to a superior 
Jurisdiction by writ of error, where nothing is to be argued but what appears upon 
the record. For having all parties before me, and a power of judging de novo, I 
shall do complete justice by punishing, as I ouglit, the delinquent on the one hand, 
and by censuring, or by punishing, the behaviour of the College on the other, if it 
be such as I do not wish to see repeated.” 

Having stated the steps in the process, he says, “ Not considering here the import 
of the evidence, I shall pronounce that Mr. Shipley was condemned unheard, and 
without such previous trial as natural justice required. Whether any fact was 
proved against him or no, is not, in this view of the subject, material. Such a mode 
of proceeding is never to be justified or allowed by a Judge. It isa natural prin- 
ciple of justice engraved upon the heart—not acquired from book-learning—that no 
one is to be condemned unheard. 

“Tt is no apology for these learned gentlemen to allege their ignorance of the 
municipal code. Let any one of them now lay his hand upon his heart, and say he 
sincerely believes that Mr. Shipley’s witnesses to prove his innocence ought to have 
been rejected. 

“I could wish that persons who are entrusted, for ingenuous purposes, with a 
despotic power over youth, would understand the first principles of justice. Were 
it a case of ordinary discipline, or of customary punishment, I should, in this 
domestic forum, turn a very deaf car to complaint, though, as representing the royal 
visiter, I can reverse any act. I should wish, in all such cases, to leave the gover- 
nors of a college almost absolute. But in the case of expulsion, I wish for temper, 
and I must have it, for I must claim it. That punishment is extreme. It is capital. 
It inflicts academic death, An independent member of the college is, by this mark 
upon him, sent home degraded, stripped of his degrees, and of advantages in certain 
professions. He comes into the world introduced by odium of character. I should 
expect that a proceeding, to be attended with such consequences, should be regu- 
larly instituted, should be conducted with temper, should be supported by solid 
proof, and be satisfactory to all reasonable minds, 

“The next branch of the charge, imputing ‘ general immorality,’ is liable to 
heavier animadversion. It is most extraordinary that Mr. Shipley, after his first 
examination, in which this imputation had never been mentioned, should have a 
sentence read against him which convicts him of ‘immoral habits’ unheard, unac- 
cused, unprepared. I am free to assert, that in this part of this proceeding the re- 
spondents have behaved extremely ill; and when I consider the learning of these 
gentlemen, I am astonished at the fact which proves them to have branded a young 
man’s character for ever, as far as their power extended, without putting him on his 
defence.” 

He then, as if a Judge in the first instance, enters into the merits of the case, 
and, upon an examination of the evidence, having acquitted the appellant of the 
charge of publishing the libel, comes to the “ general immorality :” “ No one can 
appreciate the extent of this charge. What is it? or what is it not? It includes 
atheism, baseness, want of probity. If it had stood, it would have ruined this young 
man for ever, But I pronounce, that no proof maintains this charge, and I am 
bold enough to add, that, in making it, the Dean and Chapter have infringed the 
first principles of common justice.” 


VOL. V. 19 


290 LIFE OF 


CHAPTER CXLIX. 


LIFE OF LORD CHANCELLOR CHARLES YORKE FROM HIS BIRTH TILL HE 
WAS RETURNED AS A MEMBER OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS, 


Were it not for the melancholy spectacle which presents itself at the 
end of the vista, I should start on this new excursion into the field of 
biography with alacrity and delight. ‘The subject of the present me- 
moir was possessed of the finest talents,—of the most varied accom- 
plishments,—of every virtue in public and in private life ;—-but when he 
seemed to have reached the summit of his lofty ambition he committed 
a fatal error, and the grave closed upon him under circumstances the 
most afflicting. His end was “ doubtful,” and it has cast a shade over 
the whole of his career, which ought to have appeared so brilliant. The 
attainment of the Great Seal proved his destruction. ‘* As if there were 
contagion in the touch, instant disappointment, anguish and death— 
such was the strange and melancholy fate of Charles Yorke. The 
allegory of the eastern monarch devoting one day to supreme felicity, 
yet finding every hour perversely darkened with chagrin and sorrow— 
the fable of the Persian fruit—sweet to the eye, and ashes to the taste— 
were only the image and symbol of this great lawyer’s miserable des- 
tiny.”* 

There are some examples in England of a great lawyer having a great 
lawyer for his son; but in most of these, as in the case of Sir Nicholas 
Bacon,—the father had died while the son was very young, leaving him 
to struggle for a subsistence. Charles Yorke, the second son of the 
great Lord Hardwicke, was born on the 10th of January, 1723, ina 
splendid mansion in Great Ormond Street. His father, then Attorney- 
General, and making a larger income than had ever fallen to the lot of 
an English barrister, continued near forty years afterwards to fill the 
highest offices of the law, accumulating immense wealth, and able to 
make a splendid provision for all the members of his family. Yet 
Charles, even under the enervating influence of a sinecure place which 
was conferred upon him,—from a noble love of honourable distinction, 
exerted himself as strenuously and perseveringly as if, being the son of 
a poor Scotch clergyman, who could give him nothing beyond a good 
education, he had depended entirely on his own dvailions for his bread, 
and for his position in the world. 

Like Lord Bacon, he was most fortunate in his mother; who, while 
his father was absorbed in professional and official duties, watched over 
his education with great discretion as well as tenderness. She brought 
up all her children in thrifty habits, and taught them the most valuable 


* Law Magazine, No. LXI., where will be found an able vindication of his ” 
memory from the charge preferred by Junius, 


LORD CHANCELLOR CHARLES YORKE. 291 


of all virtues—the virtue of self-denial. The boys, instead of going to 
Eton, where they were in danger of learning idleness, extravagance, and 
contempt of parental rule, were sent to a most excellent private school 
at Hackney, kept by the Rev. Dr. Newcombe, a sound classical scholar, 
and a strict disciplinarian. Here Charles remained from childhood till 
he was seventeen; and here he must have acquired the taste for litera- 
ture, and the steady habit of application, for which he was afterwards 
remarkable. He was then removed to Ben’et (now Corpus Christi) 
College, Cambridge, where his elder brother had been an under-graduate 
two years; and he was placed, like him, under the tuition of the pains- 
taking Dr. Birch. Little aided by academical rules, he now devoted 
himself to study with great enthusiasm, and he soon gave extraordinary 
proofs of his progress. 

I doubt not that, upon the whole, Cambridge, as a place of education, 
has derived benefit from the mathematical and the classical tripos since 
established, and the other distinctions at present held out to rouse emu- 
lation and to encourage industry ; but a spontaneous, genuine, ardent 
love of knowledge, which sometimes springs up in those happily born, 
and is fostered by the mutual converse of kindred minds, perhaps for- 
merly led to a higher degree of mental cultivation and really valuable 
attainment. While Charles Yorke was an under-graduate, there was 
probably a good deal of general idleness among Cantabrigians, and few 

could have gone through what now would be considered a creditable 
examination in the Greek measures or the higher mathe- 1740 
matics; but I question whether all the present resident LhmPn AiaUal 
members of the University could compose the ‘* Athenian Letters.” 

_ This work, consisting of two quarto volumes, I have lately perused, 
and I strongly recommend it to all who would, in a most agreeable 
- manner, extend or refresh their acquaintance with the institutions, the 
literature, the manners, and the distinguished men of Greece at the most 
interesting period of her history. ‘To it Charles Yorke was the principal 
contributor before he had completed his twentieth year, and, considering 
| the knowledge of books and men which his contributions exhibit, [ own 
they seem to me a more wonderful instance of precocity than the early 
Latin verses of Cowley and Milton, which clever schoolboys-can so 
closely imitate. 

The undertaking was commenced under the auspices of Dr. Birch, 
as an exercise to his pupils, for the purpose of imprinting their reading 
on their memory, and initiating them in English composition, so mise- 
rably neglected at our universities. Cleander, an agent of the King of 
Persia, is supposed to be resident in Athens during the Peloponnesian 
war, and to carry on a correspondence, not only with his court, but 
with his brother living at home, and with private friends in Evypt and 
other provinces of the Persian empire. ‘These letters are stated, in a 
lively preface written by Charles Yorke, to be translations from a MS, 
in the library at Fez, in the King of Morocco’s dominions, the supposed 
deposit of vast treasures of oriental learning. 

They were first printed at Cambridge, in’ the years 1739 and 1740, 





292 LIFE OF 


but were communicated only to a limited number of friends under the 
strictest injunctions of secrecy, ‘from an ingenuous diffidence which 
forbad the authors, most of them extremely young, to obtrude on the 
notice of the world what they considered only a preparatory trial of 
their strength.” In 1781, a new edition was published, still only for 
private circulation—the Editor paying a merited compliment to him, 
‘‘of whose talents, virtues, and services, the world was unfortunately 
deprived when they were most wanted, both by his own profession and 
by the public.” The real authorship of the different letters was now 
disclosed. ‘The work was supposed to be genuine, and a translation 
from an old Arabic version ; but when a due interval of time 
[a.D.1740.] nes Less, : wie ¢ : 
as elapsed the truth may be owned ; the illusion vanishes ; 
it is a masquerade which is closed; the fancy dresses and the dominos 
are returned to the respective wardrobes ; the company walk about again 
in their proper habits, and return to their proper occupations in life.” * 
A copy of this edition having been transmitted by the younger 
brother of Charles Yorke, created Lord Dover, to the author of the 
celebrated ‘* Travels of Anacharsis,” BaARTHELEMI returned an answer, 
which (afier making all due allowance for French politeness), must be 
considered a high testimony to the merits of our young countrymen :— 
“Si je ’avois connu plutdt, ou je n’aurois commencé le mien, ou j’aurois 
taché d’approcher de ce beau modéle. Pourquoi ne I’a-t-on pas 
communiqué au public? Pourquoi n’est-il pas traduit dans toutes les 
langues? Je sacrifierois volontiers mes derniers jours au plaisir d’en 
enrichir notre littérature, si je connoissois mieux les finesses de la langue 
Anglaise.” t 
I will give, as a specimen, a “ private and confidential” letter from 
“*CLEANDER to Hypaspss, first Chamberlain of the King of Persia,” 
upon the contrast between the manners to which he had been accustomed 
and those he saw in his travels:—‘¢ The first question you would, 
probably, have me resolve is, what peculiar difference [ find in the man- 
ners of Greece and Persia; since custom has placed as many marks 
of distinction in the civil manners of every nation as Providence has 
displayed in the natural bodies of each individual. I will tell you, then. 
A Persian would find nothing more surprising than the unbounded 
freedom of action and conversation which reigns here. The councils 
of the Great King are impenetrable, we discover nothing of them till they 
take effect; whilst here everything is known long before it is put in 
execution, and canvassed with as much liberty in common conversation 
as in the assemblies of the people. We approach our mighty monarch 
with positions of adoration, and address him in language which is used 
to the Deity. At Athens, the magistrates are distinguished more by 


* Pref, xv. ed. 1798. There having been some surreptitious editions, this last edition, 
most splendid and correct, was given to the world by the late Earl of Hardwicke. 

+ Lord Mansfield’s acknowledgment for his copy is touching : “Give me leave to 
return you my warmest thanks for the Arnentan Lerrers, 





“ Veteres revocamus amores, 
Atque olim amissas flemus amicitias.” 


LORD CHANCELLOR CHARLES YORKE. 298 


being virulently abused than by any mark of authority. Pericles him- 
self is sure to be the object aimed at by every one who writes either 
scandalous libels to be dispersed about the city, or performances designed 
for public representation. ‘The actors themselves sometimes appear upon 
the stage in masks, which are made exactly to resemble the face of the 
person ridiculed. The Persian magnificence appears most at their enter- 
tainments; the Athenian at their solemn festivals. The Asiatic feasts 
are remarkable for the vast quantities of provisions, the costliness of the 
preparations, and sumptuous furniture; the chief recommendation of the 
Greek one is the elegance and variety of the conversation, which induced 
an Athenian to make this observation: ‘Our entertainments not only 
please when we give them, but the day after.”* The Asiatic taste and 
grandeur appear in the palaces of their princes and satraps; the Grecian 
in the temples of their gods and the public buildings. Not a nobleman 
in Persia but shows his rank by the richness of his dress and the num- 
ber of his attendants ; whereas here you cannot distinguish a citizen from 
a slave by his habit; and the wealthiest Athenian, the most considerable 
person in the city, is not ashamed to go to market himself. In Persia, 
the eyes of all are turned towards the Sovereign, and they regulate their 
conduct by his; inthe free republics of Greece, the people are king, and 
resemble other monarchs in their bad qualities more than in their good 
ones ; for they are fickle and imperious, severe and obstinate.” 

In these letters Charles Yorke gives a lively representation of the 
different views that may be taken of Spartan manners, ‘Thus he 
praises :—‘¢ The Spartans banished Ctesiphon for saying he could talk 
a whole day upon any question. A rhetorician told one of their kings 
that eloquence was the most excellent gift to mankind; he answered,— 
‘ You do well to say so, because when you are commanded silence you 
are useless.?......] observed when I conducted the ambassador of 
Lacedxmon to the royal chamber, agreeably to the usual ceremony, he 
dropped a ring which he wore upon his finger, and in stooping to recover 
it made an awkward reverence to our monarch. Podarchus stood as a 
candidate a few months since to supply a vacancy in the chosen troop 
of the 300, and, upon finding he was not chosen, he went out from the 
presence of the Ephori with much seeming gaiety, and ina fit of laughter. 
They called him back, and inquired the reason of it. He answered,— 
‘he could not help congratulating the state in silence on being possessed 
of 300 braver and better citizens than himself.’ At the last Olympian 
games, another Spartan being asked whether his victory there would be 
of any service to him, he replied,—‘ Yes, for it would recommend him 
to a station before the King in battle.” The statues of the Gods are all 
in armour, to intimate that the people place their confidence in military 
force. Their sacrifices are made with uncommon frugality, because 
they imagine the Deity is more moved by the sincerity than the incense 
of the worshipper. The only prayer they offer up at the altar is, that 
they may receive good things for their good actions. All mourning 


* This reminds me of a moral sentiment I have heard given as a toast in Scot- 
land: “ May Evening’s diversions bear Morning’s reflections !” 


294 LIFE OF 


ceases in eleven days. No one is allowed an inscription on his monu- 
ment except he dies in the field. They set so much a higher value on 
a victory gained by stratagem than by force, that in the former case they 
sacrifice an ox to Mars, and in the latter no more than a dunghill cock.” 
But thus their great lawgiver is censured in describing the results of his 
institutions :—‘* The Spartans are a proud and severe people, Let them 
thank Lycurgus who has made them so. Unlike the rest of the admired 
sages who have given salutary laws to the world, instead of enlarging 
the minds of an ignorant race, he has more effectually contracted them. 
Instead of teaching them a little condescension to others, they have 
learned only to set a value upon themselves. Instead of polishing them 
into an ease and benevolence of temper, he has reformed them out of it, 
and for the sake of avoiding the refinement of luxury, he has introduced 
a neglect of that humanity in the lesser offices of life, which adds such 
a relish to the enjoyment of it.” 

In the letters there are frequent allusions to contemporaneous English 
politics. ‘Thus Charles Yorke, in another letter from Cleander to Hip- 
pias, on ‘ Ostricism,” evidently points at the resolution then generally 
entertained to drive Sir Robert Walpole from the helm: ‘* No mischiefs 
are to be wondered at in that state where a man’s merit, instead of gain- 
ing him the love of his citizens, recommends him to nothing but dis- 
grace. Good Heavens! can there be a surer sign of universal frenzy 
in a commonwealth than the punishing of great virtues with a severity 
only due to the basest vices, and rewarding high services and the noblest 
achievements with such black unthankfulness?” But we must follow 
the youthful author in his academical career. 

Avoiding Jacobite roisterers and the fellows of Trinity—‘ such a 
parcel of stupid drunken sots that the like was not in the whole king- 
dom,”*—not very regular at lecture, and sometimes missing chapel,— 
but rising in summer with the sun, and in winter lighting his own fire 
long before day; following with intense ardour the course of study 
which he preferred,—taking no relaxation but a walk with a brother 
Athenian, in which they planned a despatch to or from Babylon, he 
spent his time most pleasantly and most profitably on the banks of the 
Granta. In 1742, he took his degree of M. A. as a nobleman, and left 
the university without his merits being fully known, for he was only 
talked of as having agreeable manners, although ‘one of a set who 
were great saps and rather exclusive.” 

‘He now seriously began the study of the law. His father, on ac- 
count of the sprightliness he had displayed even in his nurse’s arms, 
having from his infancy destined him for the bar, had entered him of 
the Middle Temple, while yet in his 14th year.t Before he began to 
‘‘ keep terms” he was transferred to the ‘* Honourable Society of Lin- 


* Language of Dr. Bentley, the Master of that College. 

+ The Hon?! Charles Yorke, Esq'*, 2"4 son of the Right Hon !® Philip Lord 
Hardwicke, Baron of Hardwicke, in the county of Gloucester, Lord High Chancel- 
lor of Great Britain, was specially admitted into the Society of the Middle Temple 
the 15t day of December, 1735. 


LORD CHANCELLOR CHARLES YORKE. 295 


coln’s Inn,” of which he became a distinguished ornament.* He had 
contrived to keep some terms there while he was still an under-gra- 
duate. To free him from the temptations and distractions of Powis 
House,t where the Chancellor now lived in great splendour, our student 
had a set of chambers assigned to him in Stone Buildings, Lincoln’s 
Inn, from which he was not to migrate to the paternal mansion except 
on “high days and holidays,” by special invitation, He had not the 
advantage of sitting at a desk in an attorney’s office; but he had often 
breathed a legal atmosphere, from which he had unconsciously imbibed 
many legal! notions;—and the Chancellor, observing his acuteness and 
aptitude for instruction on all subjects, had taken a pleasure in expound- 
ing to him the elements of jurisprudence, and making him comprehend 
the bearings of any constitutional question which agitated the public 
mind, 

Thus instructed, he made a rapid progress, and by attending the 
Courts in the morning, and devoting himself to Littleton and Plowden 
in the evening, he laid the foundation of his professional eminence, 
Although he never was considered a deep black-letter lawyer, he ac- 
quired the faculty of knowing where all the learning on any point that 
might arise was to be found, and he could prepare himself successfully 
to enter the lists against men who ignorantly rejoiced to think that 
science had never taught them to stray beyond the precincts of West- 
minster Hall. Even now he did not abandon his literary tastes, and by 
avoiding frivolous amusements, and attending strictly to the improve- 
ment of small sections of time wasted by most others, he could, with- 
out detriment to his professional progress, keep an assignation with an 
eminent tragic actor or painter, and carry on a clandestine correspond- 
ence with a critic or a poet. ‘These were his dissipations. 

He had formed a great intimacy with the author of the “ Divine 
Legislation of Moses,” and this tyrant of the literary 
world was to him condescending, bland, and courteous bards head 

>? 5) . 
There is happily preserved to us C. Yorke’s very interesting answer to 
a letter of Warburton, accompanying a presentation copy of the first 
volume of a new edition of his great work :— 


“July 1, 1742. 
“ Dear Sir, 

“‘] was pleased, on returning home the other day after an excursion 
of a few weeks, to find your first volume waiting for me, with a most 
agreeable letter from yourself, full of kindness and vivacity. To speak 
the truth, [ had been meditating before [ received yours, to say some- 
thing to you on the very piece you allude to; but you have prevented 


* “Tincoln’s Inn.—The Honourable Charles Yorke, Esquire, second son of the 
Right Hon”!* Philip Lord Hardwicke, Baron of Hardwicke, in the county of Glou- 
cester, Lord High Chancellor of Great Britain, is admitted into the Society of this 
Inn the 23d day of October, in the sixteenth year of the reign of our Sovereign 
Lord, George the Second, by the grace of God of Great Britain, France, and Ire- 
land, King, Defender of the Faith, &c., and in the year of our Lord 1742.” 

+ On the south side of Grosvenor Square. 


296 LIFE OF 


me in it: —I thought only of congratulating you, but you seem to re- 
quire condolence.—And surely without reason. What signifies it that 
your adversaries are not worth contending with? It isa proof that men 
of sense are all on your side.—Like the spectres whom A®neas encoun- 
tered, you cannot hurt them by any weapons; but it should be remem- 
bered, on the other hand, they do not injure but tease, and will follow 
you the less the more you endure and despise them. You should for- 
give them too, for you began hostilities. ‘The only provision in the con- 
stitution of things, for the dud/ is the endolence of the ingenious. There- 
fore, when a man unites great application to great parts, throws down 
the fences of prejudice, and strikes out new paths in knowledge, they 
confederate against him as a destroyer of their merit, and a dangerous 
invader of their property. 

‘“* After all it is a serious and melancholy truth, that when specula- 
tive errors are to be reformed, and received opinions either rationally 
opposed or defended, the matter cannot be attempted without much cen» 
sure. The discreet upbraid you with imprudence, the prejudiced with 
absurdity, and the dull with affectation. It isa censure, however, which 
generally arises from interest; for the works of such as you contribute 
to bury many useless volumes in oblivion, 

‘“‘] rejoice that you approve of the further remarks I sent you on a 
few passages in Tunstall’s Epistle ; not only on account of your can- 
dour in doing it, but because your sagacity has confirmed what I had 
thrown out, by two or three very eloquent turns of argument. When- 
ever you treat a subject, you leave nothing to be said afier you, and for 
that reason can always improve upon others. But this is a trifle. The / 
new edition of your book shows that you can even improve upon yourt- 
self. Tully, I think, says of his behaviour in the office of fried@ship— 
‘c@terts satisfacio quam mazime, nuihi ipst nunquam satisfacro,’ And 
in writing, it is one mark of superior understanding not to be contented 
with its own produce, 

** Your correspondence is Sxbatiivaly acceptable to me. When lam 
conversing with you on subjects of literature or ingenuity, I forget that 
I have any remote interest in what is going forward in the world, nor 
desire in any time of life to be an actor in parties, or as it is called 
somewhere, ‘ subure tempestates re_publice.’ But when I find every body 
inquiring to- day concerning the report of the secret committee yester- 
day,* this passion for still life vanishes; agilis fio et mersor civilibus 
undis. 

*T am, dear Sir, with the greatest affection and esteem, 

“Your most obliged 
‘‘and faithful Servant, 
“ CHar.Les YORKE,” f 


This seems to me to be a very wonderful production, considering that 


* This refers to the Report of the Secret Committee on the conduct of Sir Robert 
Walpole, in which it was thought that Lord Chancellor Hardwicke might be impli- 
cated.—12 Parl. Hist. 788. t Warburton’s Letters, 495, 


LORD CHANCELLOR CHARLES YORKE. 297 


the writer was only nineteen years of age. He appears thoroughly to 
have understood the foibles as well as the merits of his correspondent ; 
and the advice he gives him is remarkable, not only for its boldness, but 
the felicity of expression in which it is conveyed. We must likewise 
admire the eagerness with which, notwithstanding his literary enthu- 
siasm, he was ready to plunge into the waves of party strife. 

Yet he had occasional struggles between his love of a life of contem- 
plation and a life of action. In a subsequent letter to [a. p. 1743.] 
Warburton, he says: ‘‘ The din of politics is so strong *" ° ey 
every where, that I fancy it must have penetrated into your retirement. 
It tempts me sometimes, in an indolent fit, to apply Lord Bacon’s words 
to myself—that ‘I discover in me more of that disposition which quali- 
fies to hold a book than to play a part.’ Yet, if you come to London 
this spring, you will find me engaged in what properly concerns me ; 
but your company, whether enjoyed by letter or personally, will always 
draw me back to my old studies—frustra leges et omnia gura tuentem.” 
His letters in this correspondence contain not only examples of bold 
criticism, but of daring speculation on theological subjects, consistent 
always with a belief in the great truths of revealed religion, but using 
considerable freedoms in proposing an allegorical interpretation of scrip- 
ture.* From his marvellous proficiency,—from the ripeness of his 
judgment, as well as the extent of his reading, and the variety of his 
attainments,—we must greatly doubt whether there has been any im- 
provement in the system of education for the bar and for public life, 
since his time. Had his training been a century later, he would still 
have been plodding for his degree without having begun the study of the 
law,—and he would have known nothing beyond what is to be learned 
in the narrow bounds of the modern University curriculum, whereas we 
behold him in reality, not only a sound scholar, but a fine writer, and 
qualified to enter into competition for fortune and fame with the most 
distinguished lawyers and statesmen. 

Charles Yorke was called to the bar by the Honourable Society of 
Lincoln’s Inn, in Hilary Term, 17438, while yet in his minority,—and 
he almost immediately got into considerable practice.t It was a great 

* See “ Selections from Warburton’s Literary Remains.” y 

t “At a Council held the 1§* day of February, 1745,—ordered, that the Hon>!® 
Charles Yorke, Esq'®, one of the Fellows of this Society, being of full standing, 
having performed all his exercises, and observed the rules of this Society, be called 
to the Bar this Term, first paying all his arrears and duties to this Society.” 
ae following entries respecting him are likewise found in the books of the 

ociely : y 

af Ae Council held the 8th day of May, 1754,—Ordered, That the Hon>!® Cha‘. 
Yorke, Esq'®, one of his Majesties Council learned in the law, be invited to the 
Bench of this Society ; and Mr. White and Mr. Hammet, two of the Masters of the 
Bench, are desired to attend with this order, and report his answer to the next 
Council; and if the said Mr. Yorke do accept of this invitation, he is, according to 
the Rules of this Society, to pay all his arrears and duties to the Treasurer of this 
Society before he be called to the Bench.” 

“ At a Council held the 28 day of November, 1755,—Ordered, that the Hon?! 
Charles Yorke, Esq'®, be Treasurer for the year ensuing.” 

“At a Council there held the 29th day of November, 1756.—Ordered, that the 


298 LIFE OF 


advantage to him, no doubt, to be the son of the Lord Chancellor; but, 
as has been proved by frequent instances, this would have availed him 
nothing without the power of self-denial, the talents, and the energy 
which he displayed. 

According to the usage then universally followed, he must have gone 

~,, 7 some circuit; but I cannot discover which he selected, or 
[a. p. 1744.] h Haturein . . : ; 
ow he fared in the provinces, During term time, 10 
London, he was so overwhelmed with briefs, that he was obliged to 
abandon the society and the correspondence of his friends. Hilary 
Term, 1744, approaching, thus he writes to Warburton: ‘* As business 
is coming in apace, 1 know not when I shall have an opportunity of 
conversing with you at large upon paper, unless I busy the present in a 
manner to me the most entertaining in the world.” 

As might be expected, it was chiefly in the Court of Chancery where 
the solicitors were disposed to employ him—not always from the purest 
motives. However, for the credit of the family, he never assumed any 
airs from his near relationship to the Judge, nor was there ever, as far 
as I can trace, any well-grounded complaint of his receiving undue 
favour there. His father was proud of him, and had been particularly 
delighted with his Athenian Letters; perhaps thinking truly how much 
better “Cleander” wrote than ‘ Philip Homebred,” but allowed him 
fairly to fight his own way at the bar, neither taking any indirect means 
to push him forward, nor when he heard him argue at the bar, treating 
him in any respect differently from other counsel.* 

As yet the fame of our aspirant was confined to the precincts of 
Westminster Hall and Lincoln’s Inn; for then, unless there were a 
state trial, no notice was taken of any judicial proceedings in any jour- 
nal or periodical publication ; but, while in his twenty-second year, he 
suddenly burst upon the public as a great legal luminary. At this early 
age, he published the best juridical treatise that had appeared in the 
English language. ‘ 

The spirit of Jacobitism had become very strong; there were general 
discontents in the public mind, and an invasion from France, to assist 
the Pretender, was daily expected. Lord Hardwicke, the Chancellor, 
thought it was necessary to render the laws against treason more strin- 
gent, by making it treason to correspond with the sons of the Pretender, 
and by continuing forfeiture and corruption of blood in cases of treason ; 
so that all the honours, and all the property of any one convicted of 
treason, should for ever be lost to his children and his family. Against 
this last enactment there was a strong feeling, which the Chancellor’s 
precocious son undertook to combat; not from an ungenerous nature, 
but from a desire to stand by his father, whose opinions he was bound 


Hon’!® Charles Yorke, Esq'®, Sollt Gen’, be Master of Library for the year en- 
suing.” 

* Yet it appears that Lord Camden suspected that Lord Hardwicke withheld silk 
gowns for the advantage of his son Charles, and slighted the young gentleman’s 
competitors. —Ante, p. 199. See also George Hardinge’s MS., ante, Appendix to 
Life of Lord Camden. 


LORD CHANCELLOR CHARLES YORKE. 299 


to reverence. Accordingly, during the fervour of men’s minds upon 
the subject, he brought out anonymously, but allowing himself to be 
soon discovered as the author, ‘* Some Considerations on the Laws of 
Forfeiture for High Treason.” 

Of all the departments of literature, jurisprudence is the one in which 
the English had least excelled. Their treatises of highest authority 
were a mere jumble—without regard to arrangement or diction. Now, 
for the first time, appeared among us a writer who rivalled the best pro- 
ductions of the French and German jurists. He was not only an ad- 
mirer, but a correspondent of Montesquieu; and he had caught a great 
share of the President’s precision, and of his animation. In this treatise, 
he logically lays down his positions, and enforces them in a train of 
close reasoning,—without pedantic divisions, observing lucid order,— 
and drawing from the history and legislation of other countries the most 
apposite illustrations of his arguments. The following may be con- 
sidered a fair specimen of the work, although without a perusal of the 
whole of it, an adequate idea cannot be entertained of the excellence of 
the plan on which he proceeds, or of the felicity with which that plan 
is executed: ‘It is not the purpose of this essay to attempt a justifica- 
tion of any instance in which the law of forfeiture may, in some coun- 
tries, have been carried to an extremity, as little to be reconciled with 
principles of policy, as of clemency or justice. Amongst the Persians 
and Macedonians, not only the criminals convicted of treason were put 
to death, but all their relations and friends. The descendants of Anti- 
phon, the orator, were disqualified from advancing themselves, by their 
own merit, to estates and offices in Athens. The posterity of Marius’s 
faction were excluded by a law of Sylla from the same privileges. 
When these are laid out of the case, what is the force of the answer? 
It clearly resolves into this,—that those rights, and the power of trans- 
mitting property which are derived from the favour of society, may not 
be bestowed upon such terms as shall bind the possessor to his duty, 
and for the breach be subjected to forfeiture. As to the corruption of 
blood, it may suffice to say thus much of it here: that if a man is not 
capable of transmitting property acquired by himself to an heir, it seems 
a necessary consequence in reason, which is the ground of law, that he 
shall not be capable of receiving from an ancestor either to enjoy or to 
transmit; for, however society may effectuate any man’s compassion- 
ate intention who would make a gift to the traitor’s posterity, yet the 
law, which is consistent upon every occasion, and only to be moved by 
sihoilerltdus that affect the whole, will not riaikee an effort of itself to 
supply that connecting link in the chain of descent which has been 
struck out of it for the traitor’s infamy, and the public benefit. Thus 
society, by making the loss of those rights it confers upon every man 
a penalty for the greatest crime which can be committed against his 
country, interests every relation and dependant in keeping him firm to 
the general tranquillity and welfare; at the same time, it gives him an 
occasion of reflecting that when he sets about it he must break through 
every private, as well as public tie, which enhances his crime, whilst it 


300 LIFE OF 


is an aggravation of his punishment. Nay, more, he may hope to 
escape from the justice of his country with his own life if that alone 
were to be forfeited; but the distress of his family will pursue him in 
his securest thoughts, and abate the ardour of revolution, Many in- 
stances there are of men not ashamed to commit base and selfish enor- 
mities, who have retained a tenderness for their posterity by the strong 
and generous instinct of nature. The story of Licinius Macer, who 
was father to the great orator, is very remarkable, as related by a Ro- 
man annalist. Having gone through the office of Preetor, and governed 
a province, he was accused upon returning home of extortion and 
abuses of his power. The very morning of his trial he strangled him- 
self, after having sent word to Cicero, who was preparing to plead 
against him, that being determined to put an end to his life before sen- 
tence, the prosecution could not go on, and his property would be saved 
to the benefit of his son. Upon the whole, then, where is the wrong ? 
It is agreeable to justice to bestow rights upon condition. It is the wis- 
dom of governments to lay hold on human partialities.”—He tries to 
soften the law’s harshness, with which, notwithstanding his assumed 
boldness, he is evidently a little shocked, by observing how rarely it 
would be brought into practice ; that it would be “ like Goliath’s sword 
in the Temple, not to be taken down but on occasions of high neces- 
sity—at other times, 77 tabulis tanquam in vagind reconditum.” 

At the present day, while all must be charmed with his learning, his 
ingenuity, and his eloquence, I do not think that his reasoning will 
carry general conviction, He greatly exaggerates the moral guilt of 
the treason against which the law was to be directed—that of trying, 
from mistaken principle, to restore the exiled royal family,—which he 
confounds with the treason inveighed against by the Roman writers— 
that of conspiring to subvert public liberty for individual aggrandize- 
ment ;—he utterly fails in his attempt to prove that the children are not 
punished for their father’s crime, by being made infamous and cast 
destitute on the world ;—and though a regard for the public tranquillity 
may require that a man shall try to bring about a revolution, whatever 
may be the established government, at the risk of his own life, no 
reasoning can persuade us that it is just or politic to involve his posterity 
in his ruin,* 

However, Charles Yorke’s performance was rapturously applauded ; 
his father, in defending the bill in the House of Lords, made an ex- 
cellent speech, all the topics of which were known to be taken from it, 
—and the solicitors had no longer any scruple in giving briefs to the 
Chancellor’s son, who had shown such acquaintance with his profession, 
as well as such general ability. He was now in full practice at the 
bar, and considered likely to outstrip his father in rapid promotion ; but 
in such matters there is much of chance and accident, and Sir Dudley 


Ryder remaining Attorney-General, and Murray, Solicitor, years rolled 
on without a vacancy. 


* See 17 Geo. 2, c. 39. + Ante, p. 99. 





LORD CHANCELLOR CHARLES YORKE. 301 


CHAPTER CL. 


CONTINUATION OF THE LIFE OF LORD CHANCELLOR CHARLES YORKE 
TILL HE WAS APPOINTED SOLICITOR-GENERAL, 


Cuartes YoRKE commenced his senatorial career in the autumn of 
1747, and continued a member of the House of Commons till within a 
few hours of his death. He first represented the snug 1747. 
borough of Reigate, which had passed under the grant ] 
by King William to his grand-uncle Lord Chancellor a and now 
belonged to his cousins, the Cocks’s. He succeeded his elder brother, 
who was elected for the county of Cambridge. 

On this occasion there was addressed to him by Mr. Edwards the 
following 


SONNET, 


“ Charles, whom thy country’s voice applauding calls 
To Philip’s honourable vacant seat, 
With modest pride the glorious summons wait, 

And rise to fame within St. Stephen’s walls. 

Now wear the honours which thy youth befalls 
Thus early claim’d from thy lov’d learn’d retreat ; 
To guard those sacred rights which elevate 

Britain’s free sons above her neighbour thralls, 

Let Britain, let admiring Europe see 
In those bright parts which erst too long confin’d 
Shone in the circle of thy friends alone, 

How sharp the spur of worthy ancestry 
When kindred virtues fan the generous mind 
Of Somers’ nephew and of Hardwicke’s son,’’* 


From the scanty accounts handed down to us of Parliamentary pro- 
ceedings in the middle of the eighteenth century, it is very difficult to 
discover what was his success in debate. Although he sat in Parlia- 
ment twenty-three years,—in the “ Parliamentary “History” his name 
is only mentioned five times,t We know from contemporary writers, 
that he was a smart orator, and had a considerable position in the 
House ; but it is pretty clear that he did not support the reputation he 
had acquired at the bar and by his pen; and that he remained ata vast 
distance behind the ‘silver-tongued Murray,” whom he strove to 
emulate. “. 

His maiden speech was upon a law bill; and all that we know of it 
is from a letter of Dr. Birch to the Hon. Philip Yorke, 
containing this statement as part of the aoe of the [Max ts digas! 
day)sct Your brother Charles opened his mouth on Monday, in the 
House of Commons, with some success, upon the Bill for the Relief of 

* Cooksey, 163. 
+14 Parl. Hist, 267, 325, 1008, 1275 ; 15 Parl. Hist. 270. 


302 LIFE OF 


Protestant Purchasers’? Trustees, &c. of Papists’ Effects; against 
which he urged such a weight of objections, that the patrons of it, 
Lord Gage and Mr. Fazakerley, abandoned it without any reply; and 
the committing of it was postponed.”* 

At the meeting of Parliament in November, 1748, he was selected 
to second the address moved by Lord Barrington,—the following short 
sentence being the whole record of his performance: ‘‘ The Honourable 
Charles Yorke, second son of Lord Chancellor Hardwicke, rose and 
seconded, in a very able speech, the motion of the noble Lord.” - 
However, in a letter from Mr, Etough to Dr. Birch, preserved in the 
British Museum, we have this testimony in its favour: “ The figure 
Charles Yorke made the first day of the session is an agreeable piece 
of news. Nothing can be more pleasing than such accounts of young 
men, who have the additional character of probity and virtue.” 

In 1751 he took a leading part in defending the Regency Bill, intro- 
duced on the death of Frederick Prince of Wales, whereby the Princess 
Dowager was to be appointed Regent during the minority of her son, 
afterwards George III. ; but (to gratify the King’s dislike of her, and 
his partiality for his younger son), she was to be under the control of a 
council of Regency, with the Duke of Cumberland at the head of it. 
In answer to a speech of Mr. Prowse, violently attacking the measure 
as unconstitutional, thus spoke Charles Yorke: “ Sir, as the bill now 
under consideration is designed to be, and certainly will be, a precedent 
for all future ages, I hope that honourable members, who speak for it 
or against it, will leave the person thereby to be appointed Regent en- 
tirely out of the question. If the present conjuncture were only to be 
considered, I believe that, looking to the character and disposition of the 
amiable Princess named, no gentleman would think of laying her under 

[a.D.1751.] any restraints or regulations; no one would hesitate a 
vee ‘moment in agreeing to invest her, not only with sove- 
reign, but with absolute sway ; because it would only be extending the 
power to do good. But when we are framing institutions for the govern- 
ment of society, we must not consider persons, but things.. For this 
reason our ancestors have chosen, and have handed down to us, a limited 
rather than an absolute monarchy. ‘They knew, as well as we, that a 
wise, active, and just king might be trusted with absolute power ; that 
the more absolute he was, the better it would be for society; but they 
considered how difficult, if not impossible, it was to refuse to a bad 
king the authority that had been given to a good one. For the same 
reason, a regency during the minority or incapacity of a king has 
always, by our constitution, been laid under still greater restraints and 
limitations. I care not for the theory of the constitution, so much 
dwelt upon by the honourable gentleman who spoke last. From his- 
tories, records, and precedents alone can we know what the constitu- 
tion really is in practice, and I defy any one to show that a regent or ~ 
protector has ever been entrusted with a full and absolute sovereign 


* Hardwicke Papers, 14 Parl. Hist. 266. + 14 Parl. Hist. 325. 
t MSS. 4326, B. 





LORD CHANCELLOR CHARLES YORKE. 303 


power—TI mean, as full and absolute a power as our kings have usually 
been entrusted with. The Duke of Gloucester, indeed, on the death of 
Edward IV., usurped a sole regency with absolute power; but no man 
will contend that his power was legal or constitutional ; and the use he 
made of it can never, 1am sure, be any encouragement for the Parlia- 
ment to follow that precedent. Even the good Earl of Pembroke, in 
the minority of Henry [II., when appointed Regent, was restrained 
from making grants under the Great Seal ; and his successful govern- 
ment was owing to his own wisdom, not the unlimited power con- 
ferred upon him. The honourable gentleman admits, that. when 
the King’s person or his right to the Crown may be in danger, 
the power of the Regent ought to be restrained by a council of re- 
gency. But is it not obvious, that this argument can be least 
used where it is most wanted? When the Duke of Lancaster was 
appointed Regent in the minority of Richard II., was it urged that 
his ambition might prompt him to murder the infant King, and to 
usurp the Crown? No, sir; the argument made use of on that occasion 
was, that the constitution forbad the appointment of a regent with 
sovereign power, though in charity, supposed to be a good regent,—for 
the same reason that we limit the authority of a supposed good king. 
So a council of regency was created in the infancy of Henry VI., when 
the Duke of Bedford was appointed Regent, and in his absence the 
Duke of Gloucester. If the Lords who appointed another Duke of 
Gloucester Protector, with sovereign power, in the minority of Edward 
V., had not been guided more by resentment against the Queen- 
mother and her relations than the rules of our constitution, the Plan- 
tagenet line might still have been upon the throne. There is here no 
slight intended to the Princess. In the three minorities to which I have 
referred, the mother of the infant sovereign was entirely passed over in 
the appointment of a regent ;—and a striking proof is given of his 
Majesty’s sense of the known virtues of the Princess by proposing her 
as Regent. If she is to be laid under restraints, this does not proceed 
from any jealousies we can entertain of her character. These restraints 
are only such as every wise king would choose to lay upon himself, 
Would any wise king choose to make peace or war, to prorogue or dis- 
solve Parliaments, or to remove any great officer of state, or appoint 
bishops or judges, without consulting men who have worthily served 
their country, and who are the most capable of giving good advice to 
the Crown? As to the council of regency, their power is merely re- 
strictive; they have no active power; they cannot so much as meet 
except when called by the Regent, and when they do meet they can 
take nothing under consideration but what her Royal Highness may 
recommend to them: they can act in nothing; their resolutions will 
signify nothing without her concurrence; and if they should refuse to 
consent to any act necessary for the good of the kingdom, they are re- 
movable on the joint address of the two Houses of Parliament. This 
formidable council of regency will, therefore, rather be a security to 
the Regent than an obstruction to any of her measures; for, though by 

our state maxim ‘the King can do no wrong,’ I doubt whether that 


304 LIFE OF 


[ maxim can be applied to one whois appointed to govern, 
A.D. 1753, ] R ; ba 92 : . it fins 

as Regent, in the King’s name}; and therefore it may 
much import the Princess, when Regent, that she should be able to 
make it appear, by an authentic document, that what she does has been 
thought by responsible advisers to be the most proper and necessary 
measure for the public good. [would willingly invest her Royal High- 
ness with the full exercise of all the prerogatives of the Crown, if this 
course were not absolutely inconsistent with our constitution, and if 
there were not an apprehension that the precedent, on some future occa- 
sion, might be attended with the most fatal consequences. ‘This alone 
makes me do violence to my own inclination, and compels me to banish 
from my thoughts the personal qualities of the illustrious lady now to 
be appointed Regent. If others would consider the Regent as a con- 
stitutional abstraction, I am fully persuaded that there would be a 
general unanimity as to the appointment and powers of the council, and 
no one would propose a course which would be quite novel in our his- 
tory, and the remote consequences of which might bring upon the 
authors of it the curses of posterity.’* 

Horace Walpole, in an account of this debate sent to his correspon- 
dent at Florence, says, ‘‘ Lord Strange and Sir Roger Newdigate both 
spoke against the bill, and Charles Yorke, a young lawyer of good 
parts, but precise and affected, for it.’t I must own that there is a 
good deal of flippancy as well as sophistry in this smart harangue, and 
that the orator is rather gently handled by the critic. Murray followed 
in a more statesmanlike strain,—and upon a division the * council 
clause” was carried by a considerable majority. 

The next occasion on which we can trace Charles Yorke in the House 
of Commons, was the first day of the session of 1753, when he moved 
the address. We, accustomed to see some tender scion of nobility 
brought forward for such a task, are surprised to find it assigned to a 
practising lawyer who had been several years in Parliament. He seems 
to have been a good deal laughed at for proposing “to acknowledge his 
Majesty’s wisdom, as well as goodness, in pursuing measures calculated 
to preserve the general tranquillity of Europe.” The Earl of Egremont 
moved that the words “* wisdom as well as” be left out, and other mem- 
bers violently censured the measures which were supposed to show such 
*¢ wisdom as well as” goodness ; but the amendment was negatived, and 
the address carried without a division.” + ) 

In the same session Charles Yorke restored and extended his reputa- 
tion by a spirited defence of his father, when attacked for bringing for- 
ward the famous “ Marriage Act.” Weory Fox, its great opponent, 
having dilated very offensively on “ the chicanery and jargon of the 
lawyers, and the pride of their Mufti,” went on to apply to the Chan- 
cellor the story of a gentlewoman at Salisbury, who, having a sore leg, 
sent for a country surgeon, who pronounced that it must be cut off; 

* 14 Parl. Hist. 1008. 


+ Letter to Sir H. Mann, May, 1751. Hor. Walp. Mem. Geo. II. p. 108. 
$14 St. Tr. 1275. 


LORD CHANCELLOR CHARLES YORKE. 305 


“the gentlewoman, unwilling to submit to the operation, sent for 
another more merciful, who said he could save her leg, and that no 
operation was necessary; the surgeons conferred ; the ignorant one 
said, ‘ | know it might be saved, but I have given my opinion, my cha- 
racter depends upon it, and we must carry it through ;’—so the leg was 
cut off.” Charles Yorke, rising in great anger, thus began: ‘ It is new 
in Parliament—it is new in politics—it is new in ambition’”—He then 
proceeded to draw a lofty character of his father, and describing 
in glowing terms the height to which he had raised himself by his 
merit, concluded by telling Fox how imprudent it was to attack a man 
so capable of vindicating himself and retaliating upon his accuser. 
Mr. Fox, in reply, tried to raise a laugh against him, by repeating and 
playing upon his words, ‘ Is it new in’ Parliament to be conscientious 1 
I hope not. Is it new in politics? [ am afraid it is, Is it new in am- 
bition? It certainly is to attack such authority.”* llowever, the 
House sympathised with the pious son, and these gibes were considered 
in bad taste. When the amended bill came back to be discussed in the 
Lords, the Chancellor introduced his famous attack upon Fox by a very 
touching allusion to the manner in which he had been defended else- 
where by one near and dear to him, and in which “ the incendiary had 
been punished.” + 
This quarrel made so deep an impression on the mind of Fox, that 
though generally a good-natured man,—when he heard at Nice many 
years after of Charles Yorke’s death, and the melancholy circumstances 
which attended it, he thus wrote to a correspondent with an affectation 
of querulousness, but with real malignity :—‘* I never envied Mr. Yorke 
whilst he lived, but [ must take leave to envy him and every body else 
when they are dead :, 1 comfort by persuading myself it is happier to 
wish for death than to dread it, and [ believe every one of my age does 
one or the other. But I do not find myself near a natural death, nor 
will you see me hanged, though I verily think they will never leave off 
abusing me.” And writing soon after to George Selwyn, who delighted 
in looking at old friends when laid out for burial, he says, with savage 
jocularity, “* Yorke was very ugly whilst he lived,—how did he look 
when he was dead ?”°f 
_ The last important speech of Charles Yorke was delivered, in the 
year 1754, upon the subject of extending the “ Mutiny -, 
Act” to the East Indies, when all the old arguments (Fes. 8,1754.] 
being brought forward about standing armies and martial law, he ably 


* Fox was luckier in an encounter with another lawyer in the same debate. He 
held in his hand a copy of the bill, in which were written in red ink the amend- 
ments moved by some members who pretended to be its friends. The Solicitor. 
General, standing near him while speaking, said, “how bloody it looks.” Fox 
answered, “ Yes ; but thou canst not say I did it: 


‘See what a rent the learned Casca made. 
Through this the well-beloved Brutus stabb’d.’”’ 


+ 15 Parl. Hist. 84; Hor. Walp. Geo, II. 299. 
_ t Hor. Walp. Lett. iv. 
VOL. V. - 20 





306 LIFE OF 


showed the necessity of keeping up a military force in those remote 
regions, and the impossibility of doing so unless soldiers might be tried 
by a military tribunal for an infraction of the Articles of War.*  Al- 
though no other fragments of his eloquence are to be found in the 
regular records of the proceedings of Parliament, we know from con- 
temporary memoirs that he continued to speak and to be respectfully 
listened to, in the House of Commons, on every constitutional question 
which arose till near the close of his career, 

Meanwhile, amidst all the distractions of business, and the anxieties 
of ambition, he preserved his better tastes, and he was glad to escape 
from the wrangling of lawyers, and the slang of the House of Commons, 
to criticism and philosophy. He still kept up a close intercourse, by 
visits and letters, with Warburton. On one occasion, having been dis- 
appointed in the hope of finding him at Prior Park, he thus shows the 
impression made upon him by this picturesque place, where the “ humble 
Allen” had entertained Pork: ‘‘ The natural beauties of wood, water, 
prospect, hill and vale, wildness and cultivation, make it one of the most 
delightful spots I ever saw, without adding anything from art. The 
elegance and judgment with which art has been employed, and the af- 
fectation of false grandeur carefully avoided, make one wonder how it 
could be so busy there without spoiling anything received from nature.” 
After controverting an emendation by Warburton of the text of “* Measure 
for Measure,”’+ he proceeds to give him some excellent and much-needed 
advice,—to be more tolerant to authors who differed with him: “It is 
to be expected, where any writer has the marks of an original, and 
thinks for himself, producing de swo penu things wholly new to most 
understandings, that some will have their difficulties to propose; others 
their tenets to maintain; and few will give a ready assent to truths 
which contradict prevailing notions, till time and posterity have wrought 
a gradual change in the general state of learning and opinions. What 
wonder, then, that many should write against you? How natural that 
you should defend! It was expected from you. The zeal for know- 
ledge is commendable: the deference to mankind becomes you. But 
here lies the mischief. You and your adversaries stand upon unequal 
ground. ‘They engage with that best friend and second on their side— 
vulgar prejudice. Let their insinuations be ever so malignant, provided 
they write dudly they gain the character of writing coolly! How na- 
tural that you should expostulate! If your expostulations have been 
sometimes too warm, they were not the bitter overflowings of an ill- 
natured mind, but the unguarded sallies of a generous one. Yet even 
such sallies are not forgiven you: not because those you answer have 

* 15 Parl. Hist. 

+ The Duke, in the character of a friar, says to Claudio, in order to prepare him 


for death, and dissuade him from a reliance on his sister’s intercession with 
Angelo : 


“ Do not satisfy your resolution with hopes that are fallible.” 


The divine proposes to read “ falsify ;” but the lawyer shows that “ satisfy,” in the 
sense of discharge, is the true reading. 


LORD CHANCELLOR CHARLES YORKE., 307 


deserved better, but because sensible and candid men are disposed to 
think too well and too highly of you to forgive that in you which they 
would overlook in others. And therefore, could nobody permit you to 
reverence yourself as much as I do, you would wait with patience that 
period when ‘ Answers’ will be forgotten: unless (according to the 
epigram of Martial) you choose to give flies a value and an immortality 
by entombing them in amber, It is to flatter me exceedingly to inti- 
mate that [ have contributed to Jead you into those sentiments, in which 
the very tedium of controversy, and the pursuit of noble designs, must 
necessarily confirm you,”* 

Subsequently, when he had acquired great reputation in public life 
and the most brilliant prospects were before him, thus he addresses the 
great scholar and divine :—‘ [ endeavour to convince myself it is dan- 
gerous to converse with you, for you show me so much more happiness 
in the quiet pursuits of knowledge and the enjoyments of friendship than 
is to be found in lucre or ambition, that I go back into the world with 
regret, where few things are to be attained without more agitation, both 
of reason and the passions, than either moderate parts or a benevolent 
mind can support.” + 

He proved the sincerity of his friendship for Warburton by obtaining 
for him the * preachership” of Lincoln’s Inn, which was in this instance, 
and so often has been, the stepping-stone to a bishopric, and by prevail- 
ing upon his father, who had ceased to have much respect for literature, 
to give him a prebendal stall. Thus writes the prebendary-elect to his 
crony Hurd :—** Last Sunday the Chancellor sent me a message with 
the offer of a prebend of Gloucester, as a mark of his regard, and wishes 
it had been better. I desired Mr. Charles Yorke to tell 1753 
him that no favours from such a hand could be unac- [orDed i893) 
ceptable. Yorke of his own mere motion told me he intended to write 
to the Master of the Rolls to recommend you in case of a vacancy. He 
does not know the force of his interest, but he shall push it in the 
warmest manner.” Hurd was disappointed at the Rolls, but by the in- 
terest of Charles Yorke who adopted him into his friendship, and prized 
him more highly than posterity has done, he succeeded Warburton in 
the preachership of Lincoln’s Inn, which in his case likewise led to a 
mitre. Upon this occasion he wrote to Warburton, saying,—‘“ It will 
be an election unanimous, but as little attentions please, J shall endea- 
vour to prevail upon him when | have the pleasure of seeing him, to 
mount timber on Sunday as a compliment to the Benchers.”{ War- 
burton thereupon warily suggested to Hurd,—* Mr, Yorke may be right 
in your not being too punctilious about sermons at first. But take care 
not to accustom them to works of supererogation, for as puritanical as 
they are, they have a great hankering after that Popish doctrine.” 

Charles Yorke likewise kept up a constant correspondence with the 
President Montesquieu, of which the following letter to him from that 


* Warburton’s Correspondence, 498, t Ib. 505. 
t This was in vacation time, and it is the duty of the preacher of Lincoln’s Inn 
to officiate only during the terms. 


308 LIFE OF 


distinguished jurist and philosopher is unfortunately the only remnant 
preserved to us :— 


« Monsieur, mon trés cher et trés illustre Ami, 

‘“‘ Jai un paquet de mes ouvrages, bons ou mauvais, 4 vous envoyer ; 
jen serai peut-étre le porteur; il pourra arriver que j’aurai le plaisir 
de vous embrasser tout a mon aise, Je remets a ce tems a vous dire 
tout ce que je vous écrivois, Mes sentimens pour vous sont graves 
dans mon ceeur, et dans mon esprit, d’une manieére a ne s’effacer jamais. 
Quand vous verrez Monsieur le Docteur Warburton, je vous prie de lui 
dire l’idée agreable que je me fais de faire plus ample connoissance 
avec lui; d’aller trouver la source du sgavoir, et de voir la lumiére de 
esprit. Son ouvrage sur Julien m’a enchanté, quoique je n’ai que de 
trés mauvais lecteurs Anglois, et que j’ai presque oublié tout ce que j’en 
seavois. Je vousembrasse, Monsieur. Conserves-moi votre amitié; la 


mienne est éternelle. 
‘© MoNTESQUIEU. 


“a Paris, ce 6 Juin, 1753.’’* 

In the autumn of the same year, Charles Yorke left England with the 
intention of visiting the President at his chateau in Gascogny, and ac- 
companying him to Bordeaux, that he might see how justice was admi- 
nistered in the Parliament there; but he was recalled home before this 
object could be accomplished. 

I ought not to pass over a misfortune which had befallen him, the 
severity of which I can the better appreciate, from having been visited 
by a similar one myself.t In the night of the 5th of July, 1752, a fire 
suddenly burst out from his staircase in Stone Buildings, Lincoln’s Inn. 
He narrowly escaped with his life, but he suffered an irreparable loss, 
in which the whole nation participated—the invaluable State Papers in 
thirty volumes folio, collected by his grand-uncle, Lord Somers, and 
made over to him, having been all reduced to ashes. Warburton says, 
—‘‘ They were full of very material things for the history of those times, 
which I speak upon my own knowledge.” Perhaps posterity had a 
heavier loss in the destruction of Charles Yorke’s own MSS.; for al- 
though he was too modest to talk much of them, it was generally be- 
lieved that he had prepared for the press several law treatises, which 

would have rivalled the fame of the ** Considerations on 
[a. D. 1755. ] aries r a) ee A 
orfeiture for Treason ;” and Cowper’s verses, on a like 


* In sending a copy of this letter to Warburton, Yorke observes: “ His heart is 
as good as his understanding in all he says or writes; though he mixes now and 
then a little of the French elinquant with all his brightness and solidity of genius, 
as well as originality of expression.” Corresp. p. 507. 

+ When I was Attorney-General, my chambers in Paper Buildings, Temple, were 
burnt to the ground by fire in the night time, and all my law books and MSS., with 
some valuable official papers, were consumed. Above all, I had to lament a collec- 
tion of letters written to me by my dear father, in a continued series, from the 
time of my going to College till his death in 1824. All lamented this calamity ex- 
cept the claimant of a peerage, some of whose documents (suspected to be forged) 
he hoped were destroyed ; but, fortunately, they had been removed into safe custody 
a few days before, and the claim was dropped. 


LORD CHANCELLOR CHARLES YORKE. _ 309 


misfortune which befell Lord Mansfield, might have been addressed to 
him :-— 
* And Murray sighs o’er Pope and Swift, 
And many a treasure more, 
The well-judg’d purchase and the gift 
That grac’d the letter’d store, 


“Their pages mangled, burnt, and torn, 
The loss was his alone ; 
Bur AGEs YET TO COME SHALL MOURN 
THE BURNING OF HIS OWN.” 

He soon got a new set of chambers, and furnished his shelves with 
new copies of such books as could be obtained from the: booksellers ; 
but even in consulting reports and law treatises—for years there was 
almost daily something annoyingly reminding him of those he had lost, 
—which were made valuable to him by notes and scratches, and with 
every page of which he had formed an endearing familiarity. 

For this, or some better reason, he became tired of a bachelor’s life, 
and being now in his thirty-third year he resolved to enter the holy state 
of wedlock. The object of his choice was Catherine, only child and 
heiress of William Freeman, Esq. of Aspeden, Herts, a granddaughter 
of Sir Thomas Pope, Bart., of Tittenhanger. -'To her he was united on 
the 19th of May, 1755, and with her he lived most happily till after 
bringing him three children, she was snatched away to an early grave. 

Though still what we in our time should consider quite a youth at 
the bar, who ought to be pleased with the prospect of gradually getting 
into a little business, he compared his father’s progress with his own, 
and he was exceedingly dissatisfied to think that he was not yet made 
a Judge or a law officer of the Crown. So far back as 1747 he had 
had a feather put into his cap by being made Solicitor-General to the 
Prince of Wales, and the year following he had obtained the lucrative 
appointment of counsel to the East India Company. But his only other 
preferment hitherto had been the grant of clerk of the Crown to him 
jointly with his brother John Yorke, the grasping Chancellor being de- 
sirous to keep this good thing in the family as long as possible. Dis- 
appointed at not sooner obtaining the real honours of the : 

saat tae [a.p. 1756.] 
profession, Charles now talked of leaving it altogether, 
and taking entirely to the political line, in which he flattered himself he 
might rise to be Prime Minister. It appears that he had infused his 
discontented notions into his friends. Warburton writes to Hurd, 
‘«¢ Yorke, who has spent the holidays with me, has just now left me to 
return to the bar, whose nature, virtue, and superior science, in any 
age but this would have conducted their favourite pupil to the bench.”* 

At last an opening appeared to have arisen. On the 25th of May, 
1756, died Sir Dudley Ryder, Chief Justice of the King’s Bench, the 
day before he was to have kissed hands on being raised to the peerage, 
and it was expected that this would make an immediate move in the 
law. But the assistance of Murray, the Attorney-General, was so 


* Warb. Corresp. 


310 REIGN OF GEORGE III 


essentially necessary to the Duke of Newcastle’s government in the 
House of Commons, that, although he demanded the Chief Justiceship 
as of right, the office was kept vacant six months, in the hopes of 
bribing him to forego his claim. In the meanwhile, the Chancellor 
being supposed to have all the law appointments at his disposal, his son 
earnestly pressed that now some arrangement might be made whereby 
he might be promoted. On the 2d of June, 1756, thus wrote Mr. 
Potter, the son of the Archbishop, to Mr. Pitt :— 

“Charles Yorke who has long had a wish to quit the profession, has 
taken advantage of this opportunity, and has sternly insisted with his 
father, that unless he makes him Solicitor-General now, he will imme- 
diately pull off his gown. The Chancellor yields, and has promised 
either to make him Solicitor, or to consent that he shall quit the profes- 
sion and be a Lord of the Admiralty. I think I know which side of 
the alternative the Chancellor will take. On Murray’s leaving the bar, 
and Charles Yorke becoming Solicitor-General, he would get at least 
40002. per annum. The Chancellor will compute how much that ex- 
ceeds the salary of a Lord of the Admiralty, and the vices of the family 
will probably operate so as to keep poor Charles in the only train in which 
he can be of any consequence.,’”* 

Murray having at length obtained the Chief Justiceship by the threat 
of withdrawing from public life, the administration was subverted, and 
Lord Hardwicke resigned the Great Seal. But he contrived that the 
desired promotion should be bestowed upon his son, who, on the 6th of 
November, 1756, was sworn in Solicitor-General. 





CHAPTER CLI. 


CONCLUSION OF THE LIFE OF LORD CHANCELLOR CHARLES YORKE. 


Tre first public duty cast upon Charles Yorke after his promotion, 
was to make a complimentary speech on the elevation of a rival. 
Murray, the Chief Justice-elect, was to take leave of the Society of 
Lincoln’s Inn previous to going through the preliminary form of being 
made a Serjeant at Law, that he might thereby be qualified to become 
a Judge. Mr. Solicitor, being then the Treasurer or head of the Inn, 
according to ancient usage, presented the departing member with a 
purse of gold as a retaining fee, and addressed him in a flowing oration, 
extolling his eloquence, his learning, and his qualifications for the high 
judicial office which he was about to fill. The very words of the 
answer are preserved, from which we may judge of the talent and the 
courtesy exhibited on both sides : ‘* I am too sensible, Sir, of my being 
undeserving of the praises which you have so elegantly bestowed upon 
me, to suffer commendations so delicate as yours to insinuate themselves 


* Chatham Correspondence, i. 160. 


LIFE OF LORD CHANCELLOR YORKE. 311 


into my mind; but I have pleasure in that kind partiality which is the 
occasion of them, ‘To deserve such praises is a worthy object of am- 
bition; and from such a tongue, flattery itself is pleasing, If I have 
had in any measure success in my profession, it is owing to the great 
man who has presided in our highest Court of judicature the whole time 
I attended the bar. It was impossible daily to come into his presence 
without catching some beams from his light. The disciples of Socrates, 
whom I will take the liberty to call the great lawyer of antiquity, since 
the first principles of law are derived from his philosophy, owe their 
reputation to their having been the reporters of the sayings of their 
master. If we can arrogate nothing to ourselves, we may boast the 
school we were brought up in; the scholar may glory in his master, 
and we may challenge past ages to show us his equal. My Lord Bacon 
had the same extent “of thought, and the same strength of language and 
expression, but his life had a stain. My Lord Clarendon had the same 
abilities, and the same zeal for the constitution of his country ; but the 
civil war prevented his laying deep the foundations of law, and the 
avocations of politics interrupted the business of the Chancellor. My 
Lord Somers came the nearest to his character ; but his time was short, 
and envy and faction sullied the lustre of his glory. It is the peculiar 
felicity of the great man I am speaking of, to have presided near 
twenty years, and to have shone with a splendour that has risen superior 
to faction, and that has subdued envy. I did not intend to have said so 
much upon this occasion; but with all that hear me, what | say must 
carry the weight of testimony rather than appear the voice of panegyric. 
For you, Sir, you have given great pledges to your country, and large 
are the expectations of the public concerning you. I dare to say you 
will answer them.” 

For us Lincoln’s Inn men, this was, indeed, a proud day. ‘The 
greatest of common law Judges, on his own inauguration, spoke so elo- 
quently of the greatest of Equity Judges now in retirement, after a judi- 
cial career of unequalled length and brilliancy, — and held out seem- 
ingly well-founded anticipations that the son who was addressed, would 
rival his father’s glory. All three were members of Lincoln’s Inn, and 
the scene was acted in Lincoln’s Inn Hall, amidst a crowd of barristers 
and students, many of whom, if fortune had been propitious to a display 
of their talents, would have been hardly less distinguished. 

In the following year, the Solicitor-General expected further promo- 
tion, but was doomed to a severe disappointment. After [Juny, 1757.] 
some months of anarchy which followed the resignation 
of the Duke of Newcastle and Lord Hardwicke, during which the Great 
Seal was in commission, and there was a perpetual shifting of the prin- 
cipal offices of state, the Court was obliged to surrender at discretion to 
Mr. Pitt, who then formed his famous administration. He bore no good 
will to the House of Yorke, and although he would not dismiss Charles 
from the office held by him, he insisted on making his old schoolfellow, 
Pratt, Attorney-General. This was most highly distasteful to Mr. Soli- 
citor; but afier consulting his father and his friends, he consented to 


312 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


swallow the bitter pill presented to him. Pratt was his senior at the 
bar, and had now risen into high reputation, so that it was no degrada- 
tion to serve under him. They acted with apparent cordiality, though 
it was said that Yorke never forgot the affront, and was actuated by the 
recollection of it in his intrigue against Lord Camden, when he was 
himself to have become Chancellor under Charles Townshend, and in 
the negotiation which closed his own career, when, in an evil hour, he 
actually received the Great Seal, that Lord Camden might be cashiered. 

Opposition being now annihilated, the Attorney and Solicitor-General 
had very light work in the House of Commons, and their official duty 
chiefly consisted in advising the government (which they did most admi- 
rably) upon numerous questions of international law, arising during the 
prosecution of the war. 

The first great occasion when they appeared together in public, was 

[June 12, 1758.] sf the trial of Dr. Hensey, at the King’s Bench bar, 
or high treason, in carrying on a correspondence 
with the French, and inviting them to invade the realm, It was the 
part of the Solicitor-General to sum up the evidence for the Crown, but 
he declined to do so, reserving himself for the general reply on the 
whole case,—a course which Lord Mansfield and the whole Court held 
he was entitled to pursue. His reply was distinguished by great mode- 
ration and mildness of tone, as well as perspicuity and force of reason- 
ing. The prisoner was convicted,—but on account of attenuating cir- 
cumstances, he was afterwards pardoned.* 

The only other state prosecution in which Pratt and Charles Yorke 
were jointly engaged, was that of Lord Ferrers, before the House of 
Peers, for the murder of his steward, of which I have given an account 
in the Life of Lord Northington, who then presided as Lord High 
Steward.t The Solicitor-General’s reply on this occasion is one of the 
finest forensic displays in our language, containing, along with touch- 
ing eloquence, fine philosophical reasoning on mental disease and moral 
responsibility. ‘‘ In some sense,”’ said he, ‘* every violation of duty pro- 
ceeds from insanity. All cruelty, alt brutality, all revenge, all injustice, 
is insanity. ‘There were philosophers in ancient times, who held this 
opinion as a strict maxim of their sect; and, my Lords, the opinion is 
right in philosophy, but dangerous in judicature. It may have a useful 
and a noble influence to regulate the conduct of men ;—to control their 
impotent passions ;—to teach them that virtue is the perfection of rea- 
son, as reason itself is the perfection of human nature; but not to ex- 
tenuate crimes, nor to excuse those punishments which the law adjudges 
to be their due.” 

Every Peer present said, ‘‘ Guilty, upon my honour;” and when the 
unhappy culprit had expiated his offence at Tyburn, homage was done 
throughout the world to the pure and enlightened administration of cri- 
minal justice in England. 

About this time Charles Yorke sustained a blow which long rendered 


* 19 St. Tr. 1342-1382. t Ib. 945; ante, p. 169. 


LIFE OF LORD CHANCELLOR YORKE, 313 


tasteless all the applause with which his efforts were crowned. He lost 
the chosen partner of his fate whose participation of his good fortune 
gave it all its value. When a little recovered, he described his anguish, 
and the sacred source of his consolation, in a letter to his friend War- 
burton, which has unfortunately perished, for it might have been equal 
to the letter written on a similar sad occasion by Sir James Mackintosh 
to Dr, Parr,—one*of the most beautiful of mortal compositions.* We 
may judge of its tone from the language of Warburton in transmitting 
it to Hurd :— 


“ This morning | received the enclosed. It will give you a true idea 
of Yorke’s inestimable loss, and his excellent frame of mind. He has 
read, you will see, your Dialogues. And was he accustomed to speak 
what he does not think (which he is not), at this juncture he would tell 
his mind, when labouring with grief. 


‘ Nam vere voces tum demum pectore ab imo 
Ejiciuntur, et eripitur Persona, manet res.”’t 


Upon the accession of George III. Charles Yorke was continued in 
his office of Solicitor-General, and from feeling rather a [Surr. 1761 
dislike to Mr, Pitt he seems early to have attached him- ) ‘| 
self to Lord Bute. He saw without regret the resignation of the “ Great 
Commoner,”’} and when Pratt was ‘ shelved,” as was . ; 
supposed in the Court of Common Pleas, the Attorney- LAR Goo 
Generalship was joyfully conferred upon the Solicitor, who was ex- 
pected unscrupulously to go all lengths against Wilkes. I think he has 
been too severely blamed for his conduct at this period. 

He did file the criminal informations for ‘* No. 45 of the Raises tts 


* Perhaps it contained sentiments such as these: “ My only consolation is in 
that Being under whose severe but paternal chastisement I. am bent down to the 
ground. The philosophy which I have learned only teaches me that virtne and 
friendship are the greatest of human blessings, and that their loss is irreparable. It 
aggravates my calamity, instead of consoling me under it. My wounded heart 
seeks another consolation. Governed by these feelings, which have in every age 
and region of the world actuated the human mind, | seek relief and I find it in the 
soothing hope and consolatory opinion that a Benevolent Wisdom inflicts the chas- 
tisement as well as bestows the enjoyments of human life; that superintending 
goodness will one day enlighten the darkness which surrounds our nature and hangs 
over our prospects; that this dreary and wretched life is not the whole of man; 
that an animal so sagacious and provident, and capable of such proficiency in 
science and virtue, is not like the beasts that perish: that there is a dwelling-place 
prepared for the spirits of the just, and that the ways of God will yet be vindicated 
to man.—Life of Mackintosh, i. 97. 

t+ Warb. Corr. 292. 

t Warburton, in a letter to Mr. Pitt, written soon after, tries to remove from his 
mind the impression made by some of Yorke’s manifestations of satisfaction on this 
occasion : 

“ Prior Park, Oct. 17, 1761. 


. “ The Solicitor-General has just now left this place after a visit to me of a’ 
few days. I should be unjust to him on this occasion to omit saying that to me he 
ever appeared to hold you in the highest honour, and your measures (as soon as 
ever the effects appeared) in the highest esteem. I ought in justice to add further, 
that he deceived me greatly if, at that very time when your just resentments were 


314 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


North Briton,” and for the “ Essay on Woman;” but few will deny 
that the one publication was seditious, or that the other was obscene. 
‘He was not consulted by Lord Halifax about issuing ‘‘ general war- 
rants,” and he might have been pardoned for saying that they were 
prima facie legal, as they had been issued by all Secretaries of State 
since the Revolution, however inconsistent they might be with the prin- 
ciples of the constitution. Although he ought to have opposed the folly 
of burning libels by the common hangman, which led to such serious 
riots and mischief, it should be recollected that this was a practice then 
approved by grave statesmen. He was fully justified in proceeding to 
outlawry when the demagogue had fled from justice,—and no farther 
step had been taken in the affair when he threw up his office of Attor- 
ney-General. He resorted to this resolution when, after the resignation 
of Lord Bute and the death of Lord Egremont, the government could 
not go on, and various attempts to strengthen it had failed. He then 
7 made way for Sir Fletcher Norton, who was appointed 
yee b 1Se Attorney-General on the formation of the administra- 
tion, which was called the “* Duke of Bedford’s,” but in which George 
Grenville, fatally for our colonial interests, soon gained the ascendency. 
Freed from the trammels of office (as has often happened), Yorke raised 
his reputation as a debater. Although his name is not after- 

[Jan. 1765.] aS : ne 99 

s once mentioned in the ‘* Parliamentary History, 

know from contemporary letters and incidental notices that he condemned 
the issuing of ‘* general warrants,” but that he strenuously contended that 
privilege of Parliament does not extend to the case of seditious libel. 
On this last subject he gained the victory over Pratt, and rivalled Pitt 
himself, who was in the habit of exalting or disparaging the power of 
the House of Commons, as it suited his purpose. We have a lively 
sketch. of the ‘ Privilege Debate” from Horace Walpole: ‘ Mr. Pitt, 
who had the gout, came on crutches, and wrapped in flannels, but was 
obliged to retire at ten at night, after making a speech of one hour and 
fifty minutes; the worst, I think, I ever heard him make in my life. For 
our parts, we sat till within ten minutes of two in the morning; yet we 
had but few speeches, all were so long. Charles Yorke shone exceed- 
ingly. He had spoken and voted with us the night before; but now 
maintained his opinion against Pratt. It was a most able and learned 
performance; and the latter part, which was oratoric, uncommonly 
beautiful and eloquent. You find I do not let a partiality to the Whig 
cause bend my judgment. That speech was certainly the masterpiece 
of the day. Norton would not have made a figure if Charles Yorke 


had not appeared ; but, giving way to his natural brutality, he got into 
an ugly scrape.” * 


about breaking out against the Duke of Newcastle, he did not use his best endea- 
vours, both with the Duke and his father, to repair their treatment, and to procure 
you satisfaction. But he had not then that influence with them which he has had 
since.”—Chat. Corresp. ii. 161. 

* Horace, afterwards writing to Lord Hertford, says: “Mr. Yorke’s speech 


in our House, and Lord Mansfield’s in yours, carried away many of the opposi- 
tion.” 


LIFE OF LORD CHANCELLOR YORKE. 315 


In the course of these discussions, Dunning, who had a great spite 
against the Yorkes, made a violent attack both on the father and the 
son. ‘If I were,” said he, “ to characterize a late great Chancellor, I 
should say that I cannot think he merited the appellation of a patriot, 
having ever regarded him as a decent, circumspect, prerogative lawyer ; 
that he leaned, in his notions, too much towards aristocracy; that he 
seemed, in his politics, to approach much nearer to the principles of the 
Earl of Clarendon than of Lord Somers; and that, at last, upon what 
public principles I could never learn, he joined the opposition, after hav- 
ing been in all things with the Court for forty years before. I could 
never determine whether he had, or had not, a good conception of our 
foreign interests, although I always imagined he had a thorough one of 
all the domestic connexions amongst us. I might ask whether his Lord- 
ship did not uniformly, throughout his life, pursue his own private in- 
terest, and raise the greatest fortune, and provide the most amply for 
his family, of any lawyer who ever lived; and whether, during his ad- 
ministration, the judicial promotions were not disposed of upon minis- 
terial motives, or agreeably to professional dessert? _ I might, neverthe- 
less, and ought to add, that the same illustrious personage was blessed 
with a good temper and great worldly prudence, which are the two 
handmaids in ordinary to prosperity ; that his whole deportment was 
amiable; that he possessed, in general, the soundest understanding in 
matters of law and equity, and the best talents for judicature [ had ever 
seen; and that he might be cited as an example, in this country, of the 
perfect picture of a good judge, which my Lord Bacon hath so admi- 
rably drawn. He was free from the levities, vices, and excesses which 
frequently disfigure men of a lively and fruitful fancy. His station did 
not require, nor his genius furnish him, with imaginative wit or elo- 
quence, and, perhaps, had he possessed a true taste for the fine arts and 
the polite parts of literature, he would never have been so extensive a 
lawyer,—to which, however, the plainness of his education might have 
somewhat contributed. In short, we may say that Lord Somers and he 
seem to have been, in every respect, the reverse of each other.” After- 
wards he went on with the son: ‘Ido not mean to forget that a certain 
candid lawyer united his best endeavours to strangle the habeas corpus 
bill ; but then he did it in so delicate and qualified a manner, that surely 
he cannot expect to have his pass for a first-rate part upon the occasion. 
Ticklish times, or political struggles, always bring to light the real 
abilities of men, and let one see whether a man owes his reputation and 
rank to family interest, and an attention to please, or to real great parts, 
a sound judgment, and true noble spirit. People of the latter class be- 
come for ever more considerable by opposition ; whereas the former, by 
degrees, sink to common men when deprived of artificial support, and 
should therefore never quit, for one moment, a Court; or if, by connex- 
ion or chance, they are compelled so to do, should return to it again as 
fast as possible.”* T'o these tremendous sarcasms, rendered more cut- 


* This is one of the best specimens of Dunning’s eloquence preserved to us. 
Although he was for years such a brilliant debater in the House of Coinmons, we 


316 REIGN OF GEORGE IIL. 


ting from being edged with seeming candour, Yorke is said to have made 
a spirited reply, but, unfortunately, it is lost to us. We are only told 
that, passing over with slight notice the disparaging strictures on him- 
self, he vindicated his father from all the charges brought against him. 
With respect to the abuse of judicial patronage, he cited the names of 
Ryder, Lee, Strange, Foster, Pratt, Denison, and Wilmot, promoted by 
him—* a series of almost sacred names requiring no epithets.” Of the 
Ex-chancellor’s private virtues he took rather a lofty estimate; but his 
judicial merits, which it was impossible to appreciate too highly, he justly 
held up to the admiration of mankind.* 

The Attorney-General, on his resignation, appeared at first outside 
the bar in a stuff gown, for he had not had a silk gown before his pro- 
motion to be a law officer of the Crown, and the “practice had not yet 
been introduced of making the person so promoted likewise a King’s 
counsel, so that he may not be reduced to the ranks when he loses 
office. t 

But the administration now in power, wishing to soften the Ex-Attor- 
ney-General’s hostility to them, offered him a “ patent of precedence,’”— 
to move next after the Attorney-General for the time being—which he 
accepted as a fair mark of respect for his professional eminence. Yet 
this was proclaimed at White’s to be a proof of tergiversation. ‘* Op- 
position,” writes a correspondent of George Selwyn, “seems to be on 
its death-bed ; the Yorkes have left it: Charles Yorke has been squeam- 
ish, and would not return to his old post again, but kisses hands to- 
morrow for his patent of precedency. He has acted as most lawyers 
do out of their business, with as much absurdity, and as little know- 
ledge of the world, as the fellow of a college.” ‘* When Charles Yorke 
left us,” says Horace Walpole to Lord Hertford, ‘I hoped for the de- 
sertion of Charles Townshend, and my wish slid into this couplet : 


“To THE ADMINISTRATION, 


“Our Charles, who ne’er was ours, you've got, ’tis true; 
To make the grace complete, take t’other too.” 


In the same strain Single-Speech Hamilton writes to Calcraft: ‘ Mr. 
Yorke’s patent of precedency, by himself and his friends, is stated as a 
piece of very disinterested conduct, but is considered by all the rest of 
the world in a very different light. His having a promise of being Chan- 
cellor is asserted and denied, exactly as people are differently affected 
to him; but the opinion of his being to succeed his brother as Teller of the 
Exchequer gains credit.........Mr. Yorke seemed to be so much ashamed 


can judge of his powers almost exclusively by the impression which they produced. 
It is a curious fact, that when he went into the House of Lords he utterly failed. 
Lord Mansfield and Lord Brougham are nearly the only lawyers. who have suc- 
ceeded equally in both assemblies. 

* See Law Mag. No. 1xi. p. 87. 

+ To correct this in Dunning’s case, when he ceased to be Solicitor-General, 
Lord Mansfield, with the general concurrence of the outer bar, called to him to 
move immediately after the Recorder of London. 


LIFE OF LORD CHANCELLOR YORKE. 317 


of his patent, that he did not come to kiss hands for it on Friday, which 
you know was a crowded day at court.”’* 

While Mr. Grenville was in vain trying to tax America, and to ex- 
tinguish Wilkes, Yorke, without supporting him, did not very actively 
oppose his measures, and chiefly confined himself to his practice at the 
bar, which continued undiminished, although he was now without the 
prestige of office. Having won the great Downing College cause, a 
letter of thanks, in Latin, was forwarded to him by the public orator of 
the University of Cambridge, under a vote of Convocation, to acknow- 
ledge his services, formerly in establishing their privilege of printing 
books, and more recently in obtaining a decree by which a great estate 
was secured to them for building and endowing a new College. This 
testimony was peculiarly grateful to him, as strengthening the ties which 
for generations connected his family with the University which they had 
so much adorned. Soon after he was elected one of its representatives 
in Parliament. 

_On the formation of the first Rockingham admi- [Aua. 25, 1765.] 

nistration, consisting of most virtuous men, with the 

most patriotic intentions, Charles Yorke joined them,—resuming his 
office of Attorney-General,—and, oh! if he had never deserted them ! 
In that case his career might have been prosperous to its termination, 
and he might have left an unclouded name to posterity. He did long 
steadily adhere to them, although he was fatally seduced from them at 
last. He zealously co-operated in the repeal of the Stamp Act, and the 
other popular measures of this short-lived government. 

While he was Attorney-General the second time, the writ of error 
came to be argued before the Court of King’s Bench in the famous case 
of Money v. Leach to determine the validity of * general warrants.” + 
He was rather in a delicate predicament; for his own opinion, which he 
had expressed in Parliament, was against them, and Lord Mansfield, 
without absolutely committing himself, had intimated pretty strongly 
during the discussion an agreement on this question with Lord Camden. 
Yet, as counsel for the Crown, he was bound to contend that the King’s 
messenger was not liable to the action for false imprisonment brought 
by the plaintiff for having been arrested under a gencral warrant, as 
one of the publishérs of the “ North Briton, No. 45.” — From this dilem- 
ma Mr. Attorney dexterously extricated himself by magnifying another 
objection raised to his justification, and allowing the judgment of the 
Court to pass against him on that, while he left the main question without 
any formal adjudication. 

In the spring of 1766, an intrigue was going on for bringing in Charles 
Yorke as Chancellor to a new cabinet. Thus writes Lord Shelburne to 
Mr. Pitt, giving an account of a conversation he had had with Lord 
Rockingham :— 

‘“‘In regard to the Duke of Newcastle and Mr. Yorke, though he had 
reason to believe they might be brought into every thing that was desired, 


* Dec. 1, 1764; Chat. Corr. 299, n. + 3 Burrow, 1692. #19 Sto tr1027; 


318 ; REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


yet it was to be wished that it should be proposed with a certain degree 
of regard, and that manner might reconcile men’s minds to that which 
it would be impossible ever to force them to. I observed, or at least 
thought, he avoided saying whether the seals were to be Mr. Yorke’s 
object, but seemed carefully to adhere to such general terms, upon Mr. 
Yorke’s subject, as | have mentioned.”* 

In July, 1766, when the Rockingham administration was unfortunately 
routed, Yorke, still at variance with Pitt who constructed the motley 
cabinet which succeeded, again resigned his office of Attorney-General 
which he never resumed, and he remained in opposition till the ever 
deplorable moment when he consented to accept the Great Seal. 

At the time of his last resignation he narrowly missed the office of 
Chief Justice of the Common Pleas. On Pratt’s elevation to the wool- 
sack this was given to Sir Eardley Wilmot. The Ex-Attorney General 
without his “ pillow,” preserved his good-humour, and thus addressed 
his more fortunate friend :— 


“'Tattenhanger, August 11, 1766. 
“Dear Sir, 

«| know not whether you are yet Chief Justice of the Common Pleas 
in form, but give me leave to congratulate you and the public on your 
advancement. ‘The kind and uniform friendship which you have shown 
me, makes me feel a real pleasure on the occasion. Dieu vous conserve 
dans sa sainte garde, et mot dans votre amitieé |” 

A copy of an elegant edition of Cicero accompanied this letter as a 
present, which is preserved with the following inscription upon it in Sir 
Eardley’s handwriting :— 


“Tur Girt or THE HonourRABLE CHARLES YORKE. 


“ Quem tu, Dea, tempore in omni, 
Omnibus ornatum, excellere rebus voluisti.” 


Still Yorke retained his literary tastes and friendships, and he was more 
delighted with a new book than with a well-indorsed brief. Thus he 
writes to Warburton, now in lawn sleeves :— 

“ Feb. 2, 1767. 

*“¢ My dear Lord,—I cannot resist the impulse of thanking you in three 
words for the perusal of your new discourses, as well as your last lettter. 
All the fruits of your friendship are pleasing to me. The book was most 
eagerly devoured. How do you manage always to say something new 
upon old subjects, and always in an original manner? The bookseller 
favoured me with it just on the eve of the 30th of January, and within 


* 24th Feb. 1766. 

+ He was succeeded by De Grey, afterwards Lord Walsingham. It would appear 
that an effort was then made to induce him to continue in office. Lord Chatham 
in a PS. to a letter to the Duke of Grafton, on the formation of this Ministry, 
says :— 

“I saw Mr. Yorke yesterday; his behaviour and language very handsome: his 
final intentions he will himself explain to the King in his audience to-morrow.”— 
in SS, 4 Duke of Grafton, ‘ 


LIFE OF LORD CHANCELLOR YORKE, 319 


three days of Candlemas; one of them the greatest Crvil Fast in Eng- 
land, and the other the greatest Religious Festival of Antichrist. Your 
Lordship has furnished me with such meditations for both, that I must 
add it to the account of my obligations, 
‘¢ And remain always, 
* Your Lordship’s most faithful 
‘¢ And affectionate humble Servant, 
C. Yorxr.””* 


So happy had he been with his first wife, that he had again entered 
the married state, being united to Agneta, daughter a rae p. 1769.] 
Henry Jobson, Esq., of “Berkhampstead, a lady of great 
accomplishments, with whom he lived happily, and who brought him a 
son, the late Sir Joseph Yorke, of the royal navy, said to have been the 
delight of the quarter-deck, and whom I remember the delight of the 
House of Commons, 

The Ex-Attorney-General now had a charming villa near Highgate, 
where his family resided, and to which he eagerly retired as often as the 
Court of Chancery and Parliament would permit. There Warburton 
paid him a visit in June, 1769. The following letter, notwithstanding 
its lively tone, cannot be read without melancholy, when we recollect 
that the meeting which it describes was the last that ever took place be- 
tween the two friends,—and that a terrible catastrophe was at hand: | 

«« Last Thursday we dined with Mr. and Mrs. Yorke at Highgate. It 
was not a good day ;_ but we walked on his terrace and round his domain. 
He has improved it much. But, in contempt of your datebre dulces, you 
enter the terrace by the most extraordinary gate that ever was. His 
carpenter, [ suppose, wanting materials for it, got together all the old 
garden-tools, from the scythe to the hammer, and has disposed them in 
a most picturesque manner to form this gate, which, painted white, and 
viewed at a distance, represents the most elegant Chinese railing, though 
] suspect the patriotic carpenter had it in his purpose to ridicule that 
fantastic taste. Indeed, his new-invented gate is full of recondite learn- 
ing, and might well pass for Egyptian interpreted by Abbé Pluthe. - If 
it should chance to service the present Members of the Antiquarian So- 
ciety (as it well may), I should not despair of its finding a distinguished 
place amongst their future ‘ Transactions’ in a beautiful copperplate. 
I was buried in these contemplations when Mr. Yorke, as if ashamed of, 
rather than glorying in, his artificer’s sublime ideas, drew me upon the 
terrace. Here we grew serious; and the fine scenes of nature and soli- 
tude around us drew us from the Bar of the House and the Bishop’s 
Bench to the memory of our early and ancient friendship, and to look 
into ourselves, After many mutual compliments on this head, I said,— 
‘that if at any time I had been wanting in this sacred relation, I had 
made him ample amends by giving him the friendship of the present 
preacher of Lincoln’s Inn.’ His sincerity made him acknowledge the 


* Warb. Corr, 509. 


320 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


greatness of the benefit; but his politeness made him insist upon it ‘ that 
it was not a debt which ‘he had received at my hands, but a free gift.’ 
Let it be what it will, I only wish he may show the world he knows 
the value of it. This if know, that his father, amidst all his acquaintance, 
chose the most barren and sapless—on which dry plants to shower down 
his more refreshing vain, as Chapman very sensibly called it.” * 

These two worthy divines certainly valued the friendship of Charles 
Yorke on account of his personal good qualities, but likewise on account 
of the rich church patronage which they believed would belong to him, 
for they confidently expected that he would one day hold the Great Seal 
like his father, and by heaping preferment upon them, make a better 
use of it. 

Charles Yorke’s last great appearance before the public as an advo- 
cate, was at the bar of the House of Lords, in the famous Douglas 
cause; when, along with Wedderburn, he strenuously, though unsuc- 
cessfully strove to support the judgment of the Court of Session, which 
had been pronounced against the legitimacy of the claimant. 

Horace Walpole, ever eager to disparage all who bore his name, 
giving an account of this trial in his “ Memoirs of George III.,” says: 
“Mr. Charles Yorke was the least admired. ‘The Duchess of Douglas 
thought she had retained him; but, hearing he was gone over to the 
other side, sent for him, and questioned him home. He could not deny 
that he had engaged himself for the House of Hamilton. ‘ Then, Sir,’ 
said she, ‘in the next world whose will you be, for we have all had 
you?’”+ But there can be no doubt, that in pleading for the respon- 
dent, he acted according to the rules of professional etiquette and of 
honour ; and that he displayed ability and eloquence not surpassed by 
any who joined in the noble strife. 

After the judgment of reversal, he very handsomely came forward to 
vindicate Andrew Stewart, the Duke of Hamilton’s agent in conducting 
the cause, from the aspersions cast. upon him by Lord Mansfield and 
Lord Camden. Thus he wrote to him, intending that the letter should 
be made public: ‘‘ Let me beg of you one thing as a friend—not to be 
too anxipus, nor feel too much because things impertinent or injurious 
are said of yourself. Can any man exert his talents and industry in 
public or private business without staking his good name upon it? or at 
least exposing himself to the jealousy of contending parties, and even to 
their malice and detraction ?”—** All who study the cause must, be con- 
vinced of the purity of vour intentions, and the integrity and honour of 
your conduct.”—*“ The sincere opinion of a friend declared on such oc- 
casions so trying and important, is the genuine consolation of an honest 
mind. In such causes, an advocate is unworthy of his profession who 
does not plead with the veracity of a witness and a Judge.” 

Whether in or out of office—while Charles Yorke maintained the in- 
dependence of the bar, he behaved with great courtesy to the Judges 
before whom he practised :—‘‘ It was impossible,” says George Hard- 


* Warb. Corr, 432. t Vol. iii. 302, 


LIFE OF LORD CHANCELLOR YORKE 394 


inge, ‘‘ to conceive any deportment more graceful in good manners for 
the bench than Mr. Yorke’s towards Lord Camden, a& long as the latter 
held the Seals,—and these attentions were mutual. Indeed the Court 
and the Bar were upon terms of the most amiable intercourse ima- 
ginable.’’* 

Although Charles Yorke had been professedly in opposition since the 
last resignation of his office of Attorney-General in July, 1766, he was 
supposed at times to have coquetted with the ministry, but latterly he 
had allied himself more closely with the Rockingham Whigs. His 
elder brother, the second Earl of Hardwicke, was a most zealous mem- 
ber of that party. After Lord Chatham’s resuscitation, which followed 
his resignation, the two sections of the Whig party were reconciled, and 
formed a formidable opposition to the Court, now bent on [a. p, 1770. 
taxing America, and trampling on the liberties of the 1°" °° °"‘ ‘| 
people by persisting in the perpetual disqualification of Mr. Wilkes to 
sit in Parliament. If all the Whigs were true and steady to their en- 
gagements, the greatest hopes were entertained that the illiberal mem- 
bers of the cabinet might be compelled to resign ;—that America might 
be conciliated, and that tranquillity and the constitution might be re- 
stored at home. 

With this prospect opened the session of 1770; when Lord Chatham, 
having again thundered against ministerial corruption ¢ 
and imbecility, Lord Camden made his startling dis- LYN 2s bt Ds] 
closure, that for years he had absented himself from the council when 
the most important subjects of colonial and domestic policy were de- 
bated there, because he utterly condemned the course which his col- 
leagues were obstinately pursuing.t The total surrender of the go- 
vernment depended upon whether any lawyer, of decent character and 
abilities, could be found to succeed him. Lord Shelburne, knowing this, 
had declared in the House of Lords, ‘“‘ that the Seals would go a beg- 
ging; but he hoped there would not be found in the kingdoma wretch 
so base and mean-spirited as to accept them on the conditions on which 
they must be offered.”t This was in the night of Tuesday, the 9th of 
January. 

A meeting of the opposition leaders was held next morning, when 
they resolved that Lord Camden should be requested to hold the Great 
Seal till he should be dismissed ; and that all their in- (Jan. 10, 1770 
fluence should be used to prevent any lawyer of cha- plas 4 


* MS. Life of Lord Camden. 


t Horace Walpole says: ‘The Duke of Grafton accused him of having made no 
objection to Lutterell’s admission; his friends affirmed he had; and Lord Sandwich 
allowed that he had reserved to himself a liberty of acting as he pleased on every 
question relating to Wilkes. The Chancellor’s mind certainly fluctuated between 
his obligations to Lord Chatham and the wish to retain his post. The Duke of 
Grafton’s neglect determined the scale.’— Walp. Mem. Geo. LIT. iv. 42. 

t Horace Walpole represents that General Conway tried to prevail upon the Duke 
of Grafton to continue Lord Camden in office, and that the Duke “told him he was 
to see a person of consequence at night on that subject.” ‘That person,” said 
Horace to Conway, “is Charles Yorke, who is afraid of being seen going into the 
Duke’s house by daylight.”—Memoirs of George III. iv. 44. 

VOL. V. 21 


322 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


racter from agreeing to accept it. Simultaneously the King and his 
“‘ friends” determined that if Lord Camden did not voluntarily resign, 
he should be dismissed, and that a successor to him must be found at 
any price. Lord Mansfield would have been the first object of their 
choice, but in less ticklish times he had expressed a firm purpose never 
to exchange his permanent office of Chief Justice of the King’s Bench 
for the fleeting éclat of the Chancellorship.* The great effort to be 
made was to gain over Charles Yorke, whose secession would add much 
(Jaw-'11] credit to their cause, and materially damage the Whigs. 
‘“""4 A letter was immediately written to him making an over- 
ture in very general terms, and in the evening of the following day a 
long interview took place between him and the Duke of Grafton. The 
(Jan. 11.] Great Seal was now distinctly offered to him, and when he 
*“""4 talked of his past political connexions a hope was held out 
to him of the admission of some of his friends into the Cabinet, and of 
the adoption of a more liberal policy. He required time for considera- 
tion, but seemed in a humour so complying that the Duke of Grafton 
made a very favourable report to the King of the state of the negotiation. 
Charles Yorke, however, having stated what had passed to a meeting 
of Whigs at Lord Rockingham’s, they pronounced the whole proceeding 
treacherous and deceitful ; they foretold that, as soon as he had been 
inveigled to leave his party, the Court would treat him with contumely, 
[Jan.12.] and they prevailed upon him to give them a pledge that he 
*““"t would be true to them. He returned to the Premier, and 
declared that he positively declined the Great Seal. Being then asked 
if he had any objection to see the King, who had condescendingly ex- 
pressed a wish to confer with him, he said he considered himself bound 
as a faithful subject to obey what he considered a command from his 
Sovereign, and he showed such alacrity in yielding to the wish, as to 
create a belief in the Duke’s mind that he had voluntarily solicited the 
[Jan.13.] interview. It took place at St. James’s, on Saturday the 
‘418th of January. The particulars of the conversation are 
not known, but as yet Charles Yorke remained firm, and the King, with 
great concern, wrote to the Duke of Grafton that he had been able to 
make no impression on the obstinate lawyer. 
This refusal caused great joy among the Whigs, and news of it being 
sent to Hayes, where Lord Chatham then was, he thus wrote :— 


“Wednesday, 17th Jan. 1770. 

‘‘ Mr. Yorke’s refusal is of moment; and I can readily believe it, 
from my opinion of his prudence and discernment. No man with a 
grain of either would embark in a rotten vessel in the middle of a tem- 
pest, to go he knows not whither. I wish our noble and amiable Chan- 
cellor had not been so candid as to drag the Great Seal for one hour at 


* Horace Walpole says: “It had been thought necessary to make Lord Mans. 
field the compliment of offering him the Seals ;” but if this offer was then repeated, 
it must have been an empty form, 





LIFE OF LORD CHANCELLOR YORKE. 323 


the heels of a desperate minister, after he had hawked it about with 
every circumstance of indignity to the holder of it.” 


But before these characters were traced, the prudence and the virtue of 
Charles Yorke had been overpowered. ‘The ministers had abandoned 
all hope of gaining him, and were thinking of pressing the Great Seal 
on Sir Eardley Wilmot or De Grey, the Attorney-General ;* but the 
King himself, without consulting them, with great dexterity and energy, 
made an attempt—which at first seemed crowned with brilliant success 
—though it terminated so fatally. 

On Tuesday, the 16th of January, there was a levée at St. James’s, 
and Charles Yorke thought it his duty to attend for the purpose of tes- 
tifying his loyalty and personal respect for the Sovereign. To his great 
surprise he met with a very gracious reception, and the Lord ane1é 
in waiting informed him that his Majesty desired to see him yy18.] 
in his closet when the levée was. over. He hardly thought it possible 
that the offers to him should be repeated, but he resolutely determined at 
all events to be faithful to the engagements into which [a.p. 1770 
he had entered. Again led into temptation, he was un- '" ~* ‘J 
done. Long after he entered the King’s closet he firmly, though re- 
spectfully, resisted the solicitations by which he was assailed—urging, 
by way of excuse, his principles, the opinions he had expressed in Par- 
liament, his party connexions, and the pledge he had given to his 
brother. But he could not stoutly defend his reasons against a royal 
opponent, who naturally thought himself entitled to the services of all 
born under allegiance to the English crown, and who could not well 
appreciate objections to the performance of the duties of a subject. 
The King made some impression by declaring, that with such a Chan- 
cellor as he wished, an administration might soon be formed which the 
nation would entirely approve. At last the yielding disputant had no 
answer to make, when conjured to rescue his Sovereign from the de- 
grading combination by which the throne was besieged; his virtue 
cooled as his loyalty was inflamed; unable longer to resist,—without 
making any stipulations for himself, with respect to pension or teller- 
ship,—he sank down on his knees in token of submission,—and the 
King, giving him his hand to kiss, hailed him as “ Lord Chancellor of 
Great Britain.” 

Charles Yorke, by his Majesty’s command, then proceeded to the 
house of the Duke of Grafton, to inform him of what had happened. 


* Horace Walpole thus notices the lawyers who might have been thought of for 
Chancellor at this time: “ Norton had all the requisites of knowledge and capacity, 
but wanted even the semblance of integrity, though for that reason was probably 
the secret wish of the Court. He was enraged at the preference given to Yorke; 
yet nobody dared to propose him even when Yorke had refused. Sir Eardley 
Wilmot had character and abilities, but wanted health. The Attorney-General, De 
Grey, wanted health and weight, and yet asked too extravagant terms. Dunning, 
the Solicitor-General, had taken the same part as his friends, Lord Camden and 
Lord Shelburne. Of Lord Mansfield there could be no question; when the post 
was dangercus, his cowardice was too well known to give hopes that he could be 
pressed to defend it.”—Mem. Geo. II. iv, 49, 


324 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


[Jan. 16.] The minister, all astonishment, could not believe his own 

*“""4 ears, and hurried down to St. James’s,—where the King 
fully confirmed the news of the victory which had been won. It was 
then resolved that the Seal should be forthwith taken from Lord Cam- 
(Jan. 17.] den, and the next morning he was summoned to surrender 

‘“ "+ it.—This being accordingly done, inthe evening of the same 
day a council was held, at the Queen’s House, for delivering it to the new 
Chancellor, and administering to him the oaths of office. 

As he was never installed in Westminster Hall, nor ever sat in the 
Court of Chancery, there is no entry respecting him as Chancellor to 
be found in the Close Roll, or in the records of the Crown Office ; but 
the following minute appears in the books of the Privy Council :— 

‘¢ At the Court at the Queen’s House, the 17th of January, 1770, 

*¢ Present, the King’s Most Excellent Majesty in Council. 

*‘ His Majesty in Council was this day graciously pleased to deliver 
the Great Seal to the Right Honourable Charles Yorke, Esquire, who 
was thereupon, by his Majesty’s command, sworn of his Majesty’s Most 
Honourable Privy Council, and likewise Lord High Chancellor of Great 
Britain, and accordingly took his place at the board.” 

At the same time a warrant was signed by the King for a patent 
raising him to the peerage, by the title of Baron Morden, of Morden, in 
the county of Cambridge. 

As soon as the council was over, Lord Chancellor Charles Yorke, 
carrying away the Great Seal with him in his carriage, drove to Lord 
Rockingham’s, to communicate to him what he had done. It so hap- 
pened that Lord Rockingham, Lord Hardwicke, and the other leaders 
of opposition were then holding a meeting to concert measures against 
the Government. He was introduced to them, and unfolded his tale. 
We are told that it was received with a burst of indignation, and that 
all present upbraided him for a breach of honour. 

He instantly left them, and went home, his mind sorely harassed 
with the severity of their reproaches. 

It was announced that very evening that he was dangerously ill, and 
at five o’clock in the evening of Saturday the 20th of January, three 
days after he had been sworn in Chancellor, he was no more. His 
patent of nobility had been made out and was found in the room in 
which he died, but the Great Seal had not been affixed to it, so that the 
title did not descend to his heirs. He expired in the forty-eighth year 
of his age. 

A suspicion of suicide immediately arose, and a controversy has ever 
since been maintained on the question whether that suspicion was well 
founded. Fortunately it is no part of my duty to give an opinion upon 
a subject so delicate and so painful. Would to God that I could entirely 
avoid it! I shall content myself with stating the authorities on both 
sides, leaving the reader to draw his own conclusion. In our time, on 
a death so sudden occurring, a coroner’s inquest would be held as a 
matter of course ; but no coroner’s inquest was held, although it would 





LIFE OF LORD CHANCELLOR YORKE, $25 


appear that the body was exhibited by order of the family to check the 
circulation of the rumours which were afloat. 

About three weeks after the event, there came out in the “ Public 
Advertiser,” a letter to the Duke of Grafton from Juntus, in which that 
unscrupulous writer, alluding to the dismissal of Lord Camden and the 
death of Charles Yorke, says : “ One would think, my Lord, you might 
have taken this spirited resolution* before you had dissolved the last of 
those early connexions, which once, even in your own opinion, did honour 
to your youth—before you would oblige Lord Granby to quit a service 
he was attached to—before you had discarded one Chancellor and killed 
another. ‘To what an abject condition have you laboured to reduce the 
best of Princes, when the unhappy man who yields at last to such 
personal instance and solicitation as never can be fairly employed 
against a subject, feels himself degraded by his compliance, and is un- 
able to survive the disgraceful honours which his gracious Sovereign 
had compelled him to accept. He was a man of spirit, for he hada 
quick sense of shame, and death has redeemed his character. I know 
your Grace too well to appeal to your feelings upon this event; but 
there is another heart, not yet, I hope, quite callous to the touch of 
humanity, to which it ought to be a dreadful lesson for ever.” 

Sir Nathaniel Wraxall, commenting on this passage, says: “ The 
transaction to which Junius refers is one of the most tragical which has 
taken place in our time. Mr. Yorke closed his existence in a manner 
strongly resembling the last scene of the lamented »” mention- 
ing the name of an illustrious man, who, in a fit of mental aberration, 
arising from deep grief, had shortened his days. 

Jeremiah Markland, on the 5th of February, 1770, thus wrote to 
Mr. Bowyer :— 

“Your letter of February 1, gave me a new and melancholy light 
concerning the last Chancellor who died........ ! But the spirit which 
appears in many of our nobility, and the cession of one great wicked 
man, whose parts, I was afraid (and there was more reason for the 
fear than, | presume, was generally apprehended), had got an entire 
superiority over the weakness of another, have made me very easy as 
to political matters. I had expressed my apprehensions in many politi- 
cal squibs and crackers, which I had occasionally let off; but shall now 
suppress them as unnecessary. The last was this :-— 





To the D. of G. 


“ How strangely Providence its ways conceals! 
From Pratt it takes, Yorke it takes from, the Seals; 
Restore them not to Pratt, lest men should say 
Thou’st done one useful thing in this thy day.” 


In Horace Walpole’s ‘Memoirs of the Reign of George III.” it is 
said, “ After struggling with all the convulsions of ambition, interest, 
fear, horror, dread of abuse, and, above all, with the difficulty of refu- 


* The Duke’s own resignation. + Nichol’s Literary Anecdotes, vol. iv. 298. 


326 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


sing the object of his whole life’s wishes, and with the despair. of re- 
covering the instant—if once suffered to escape—Charles Yorke, having 
taken three days to consider, refused to accept the Seals of Chancel- 
lor.”* * * * “Mr, Conway acquainted me in the greatest secrecy that 
the Duke of Grafton, dismayed at Yorke’s refusal of the Great Seal, 
would give up the administration. Not a lawyer could be found able 
enough,—or if able, bold enough,—or if bold, decent enough,—to fill 
the employment.” * * * ‘* What was my astonishment when Mr. On- 
slow came and told me that Yorke had accepted the Seals! He had 
been with the King over-night (without the knowledge of the Duke of 
Grafton), and had again declined ; but being pressed to reconsider, and 
returning in the morning, the King had so overwhelmed him with flat- 
teries, entreaties, prayers, and at last with commands and threats of 
never giving him the post if not accepted now, that the poor man sank 
under the importunity, though he had given a solemn promise to his 
brother, Lord Hardwicke, and Lord Rockingham, that he would not 
yield. He betrayed, however, none of the rapaciousness of the times, 
nor exacted but one condition, the grant of which fixed his irresolution. 
The Chancellor must, of necessity, be a Peer, or cannot sit in the House 
of Lords.t| The coronet was announced to Yorke, but he slighted it 
as of no consequence to his eldest son, who would probably succeed his 
uncle, Lord Hardwicke, the latter having been long married, and having 
only two daughters. But Mr. Yorke himself had a second wife, a very 
beautiful woman, and by her had another son, She, it is supposed, 
urged him to accept the Chancery as the King offered, or consented 
that the new peerage should descend to her son, and not to the eldest. 
The rest of his story was indeed melancholy, and his fate so rapid as 
to intercept the completion of his elevation. He kissed the King’s hand 
on the Thutsday sf and from Court drove to his brother, Lord Hard- 
wicke’s,—the precise steps of the tragedy have never been ascertained. 

Lord Rockingham was with the Earl. By some it was affirmed that 
both the Marquis and the Earl received the unhappy renegade with bit- 
ter reproaches. Others, whom I rather believe, maintained that the 
Marquis left the House directly, and that Lord Hardwicke refused to 
hear his brother’s excuses, and, retiring from the room, shut himself 
into another chamber, obdurately denying Mr. Yorke an audience. At 
night it was whispered that the agitation of his mind, working on a most 
sanguine habit of body, inflamed of late by excessive indulgence both 
in meats and wine, had occasioned the bursting of a blood-vessel, and 


* Horace Walpole is very inaccurate as to dates in this part of his Memoirs. For 
example, he represents the speeches respecting the dismissal of the Chancellor and 
the acceptance of the Seals by another lawyer, made in the House of Lords on the 
9th of January, the first day of the Session, as made on the 15th of January, when 
Lord Camden was substantially dismissed, and Charles Yorke had twice refused to 
succeed him.—Mem. Geo. III, iv. 48. 

t Horace is here inaccurate in his law as well as his facts. 

t This, again, is a mistake, for the Great Seal had actually been delivered to him 
on Wednesd: ay, the 17th of January; and it was on the evening of this same day 
that he drove to Lord Rockingham’s, 


LIFE OF LORD CHANCELLOR YORKE, 327 


the attendance of surgeons was accounted for by the necessity of bleed- 
ing him four times on Friday. Certain it is, that he expired on the 
Saturday between four and six in the evening. His servants in the first 
confusion had dropped too much to leave it in the family’s power to 
stifle the truth, and though they endeavoured to colour over the catas- 
trophe by declaring the accident natural, the want of evidence and of 
the testimony of surgeons to colour the tale given out, and which they 
never took any public means of authenticating, convinced every body 
that he had fallen by his own hand—whether on his sword, or by a 
razor, was uncertain,”’* 

Cooksey, a relation of the Hardwicke family, on the mother’s side, 
in his ‘“¢ Life of Lord Hardwicke,” gives an account of Lord and Lady 
Hardwicke’s children ; and, after introducing Philip, the eldest son, thus 
proceeds : ‘ Being a capital supporter of the principles and party which 
was headed by the amiable Marquis of Rockingham, there was no post 
or office in administration to which he might not have been appointed, 
as there were none to which his abilities would not have done honour, 
That body of respected and real patriots generally held their private 
meetings and consultations at his Lordship’s house in St. James’s Square ; 
and it was at one of those that his brother appeared with the Seals which 
his Majesty had prevailed on him to accept, on the resignation of Lord 
Camden. The expressive silence with which he was received and dis- 
missed by that illustrious assemblage of his friends, made him but too 
sensible of their disapprobation of his conduct. His self-condemnation 
of it, also, and horror of consequential shame and diminution of his high 
character, proved fatal to his life. His last moments gave Lord Hard- 
wicke an occasion of expressing his nice sense of honour and refined 
delicacy. ‘The Seals, and the patent creating him Baron Morden, were 
on a table in the apartment of the dying Chancellor. ‘ What hinders,’ 
said one of his friends, ‘the Great Seal being put to this patent, whilst 
his Lordship yet lives?’ ‘I forbid it! said his noble brother. ‘ Never 
shall it be said of one of our family, that he obtained a peerage under 
the least suspicion of a dishonourable practice.’”” The biographer then 
introduces the second son: ‘Charles, who after displaying the most 
shining abilities in the several law offices of Solicitor and Attorney- 
General, was unhappily appointed Lord Chancellor of England on Jan- 
vary 17, 1770; which appointment not being attended with the appro- 
bation of his friends or his own, had such effect on his feelings as to 
render life insupportable. He quitted it on the 20th of the same month, 
to the inexpressible grief of all good men who knew him. Happily he 
leaves a son, heir to his virtues and the honours and great estates of his 
farnily.”’F 

Belsham, in his History of the reign of George III., thus describes 
the last hours of Charles Yorke :—‘* Lord Camden, having in the course 
of the debate condemned, in decisive terms, the proceedings of the House 
of Commons, and actually divided on this occasion with Lord Chatham, 


* Mem. of Geo. III, iv. 48-53. : + Cooksey, 43. 


328 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


was immediately compelled to relinquish the Great Seal; but such was 
the political consternation prevailing at this crisis, that no person com- 
petent to the office could be persuaded to accept it. Mr. Yorke, Attor- 
ney-General, son of the late Lord Chancellor Hardwicke, a man of the 
highest professional ability, had given, as was reported and believed, a 
positive assurance to the Earl his brother, that he would not, upon any 
terms, listen to the offers of the Court; but, upon being sent for by the 
King and earnestly solicited, he at length, in a fatal moment, consented, 
and a patent was immediately ordered to be prepared for his elevation 
to the peerage, by the title of Lord Morden. On repairing to the resi- 
dence of his brother, in order to explain to him the motives of his 
acceptance, he was refused admission ; and in the agitation of his mind, 
unable to endure the torture of his own reflections, he in a few hours 
put an end to his existence.””* 

Other compilers of Memoirs and Magazines, which have been subse- 
quently given to the world, have repeated the story, without any cor- 
roboration of it. But much weight must be given to the following very 
interesting extract from the MS. journal of the Duke of Grafton :— 

‘“‘ Parliament was to meet on the 9th of January, 1770. The neces- 
sity of having a Chancellor to vindicate the law authority of the Cabi- 
net was dinned into my ear in most companies I frequented ; and it was 
particularly remarked that Mr. Charles Yorke had taken no part in the 
whole business of the Middlesex election that need preclude him from 
joining in opinion with the decisions of the Commons. Such insinua- 
tions were very irksome to me, and about the Court I was still more 
harassed with them. At last, when I was passing a few Christmas holi- 
days at Euston, Lords Gower and Weymouth came down on a visit. 
They informed me that the King, on hearing their intention of going to 
Euston, had expressly directed them to say, that the continuation of the 
Lord Chancellor in his office could not be justified, and that the Go- 
vernment would be too much lowered by the Great Seal appearing in 
opposition, and his Majesty hoped that I should assent to his removal, 
and approve of an offer being made to Mr. Yorke. My answer, as well 
as I recollect was, that ‘though it did not become me to argue against 
his Majesty’s remarks on the present peculiar state of the Great Seal, I 
must humbly request that I might be in no way instrumental to dismiss- 
ing Lord Camden.’ 

‘“‘In a few days after my arrival in London the session opened, when 
[Jaw. 9, 1770.] es Lord een geles spoke warmly in support of Lord 

atham’s opposition to the address, and while we 
were in the House, Lord Camden told me that he was sensible the Seal 
must be taken from him, though he had no intention to resign it, At 
St. James’s it was at once decided that the Seal should be demanded : 
but, at my request, Lord Camden held it for some days, merely for the 
convenience of Government, during the negotiation for a respectable 
successor. No person will deny that Mr. Charles Yorke, Sir Eardley 


* Belsham, i. 303. 





LIFE OF LORD CHANCELLOR YORKE. 329 


Wilmot, and Mr. De Grey would, any of them, have filled the high 
office of Lord Chancellor with the full approbation of Westminster Hall. 
They were all three thought of for it, though Sir Eardley’s infirm state 
of health, accompanied by an humble diffidence of himself, which had 
been a distinguishing mark in his character through life, forbad the 
hopes of his acceptance. 

‘** While I continued in office it was my duty as well as desire to exert 
myself in endeavouring to render the King’s administration as respect- 
able as I was able, though I lamented and felt grievously the loss of 
Lord Camden’s support, from which I derived so much comfort and as- 
sistance; yet I was satisfied that the lawyers I have mentioned were 
men equal to discharge the duties of a Chancellor. J therefore received 
the King’s commands to write to Mr. Yorke directly. Isaw him the 
next day. He received the offer of the Great Seal with much gratitude 
to his Majesty, but hoped that he should be allowed to return his answer 
when he should have given it a day’s consideration. Mr, Charles Yorke 
remained with me between two and three hours, dwelling much on the 
whole of his own political thoughts and conduct, together with a com- 
ment on the principal public occurrences of the present reign. When 
he came to make remarks on the actual state of things, after speaking 
with much regard of many in administration, he said that it was essen- 
tial to him to be informed from me whether I was open to a negotiation 
for extending the administration, so as to comprehend those with whom 
I had formerly and he constantly wished to agree. My answer was, 
that he could not desire more earnestly than myself to see an adminis- 
tration as comprehensive as possible, and that this object could only be 
brought about by the union of the Whigs— adding that I should be 
happy to have his assistance to effect it. Mr, Yorke appeared to be 
pleased with this answer, and after many civilities on both sides we 
parted. On his return to me the next day, I found him a quite altered 
man, for his mind was then made up to decline the offer from his Ma- 
jesty, and that so decidedly that [ did not attempt to say anything far- 
ther on the subject. He expressed, however, a wish to be allowed an 
audience of his Majesty. This was granted, and at the conclusion of it 
the King, with the utmost concern, wrote to acquaint me that Mr. Yorke 
had declined the Seal. On his appearing soon after at the levée, his 
Majesty called him into his closet imfhediately after it was over. What 
passed there I know not, but nothing could exceed my astonishment 
when Lord Hillsborough came into my dressing-room in order to tell 
me that Mr. Yorke was in my parlour, and that he was Lord Chancel- 
lor through the persuasion of the King himself in his closet. Mr. Yorke 
corroborated to me what I had heard from Lord Hillsborough, and I 
received the same account from his Majesty as soon as I could get down 
to St. James’s. 

“Mr. Yorke stayed but a little time with me, but his language gave me 
new hopes that an administration might shortly be produced which the 
uation would approve. How soon did this plausible hope vanish into a 
visionary expectation, only from the death of Mr. Yorke before he be- 


330 REIGN OF GEORGE IIL 


came Lord Morden, or we could have any preliminary discourses on the 
measure. he earnestly desired to forward! I had long been acquainted 
with Mr. Yorke, and held him in high esteem, He certainly appeared 
less easy and communicative with me from the time of his acceptance 
to his death than [ might expect, but it was natural to imagine that he 
would be more agitated than usual when arduous and intricate business 
was rushing at once upon him. I had not the least conception of any 
degree of agitation that could bring him to his sad and tragical end. 
Nor will I presume to conjecture what motives in his own breast, or 
anger in that of others, had driven him to repent of the step he had 
just taken. By his own appointment I went to his house about nine 
o’clock in the evening, two days, as I believe, after Mr. Yorke had been 
sworn in at a council board summoned for that purpose at the Queen’s 
House. Being shown into his library below, I waited a longer time 
than I supposed Mr. Yorke would have kept me without some extraor- 
dinary cause. After above half-an-hour waiting, Dr. Watson, his physi- 
cian, came into the room; he appeared somewhat confused—sat him- 
self down for a few moments, letting me know that Mr. Yorke was 
much indisposed with an attack of colic. Dr. Watson soon retired, and 
I was ruminating on the untowardness of the circumstance—never sus- 
pecting the fatal event which had occurred, nor the still more lament- 
able cause ascribed for it by the world, and, as I fear, upon too just 
ground. 

“‘T rung the bell and acquainted one of the servants that Mr, Yorke 
was probably too ill to see me, and that I should postpone the business 
on which I came to a more favourable moment. Mr. Yorke, I believe, 
was a religious man. It is rare to hear of such a person being guilty 
of an action so highly criminal. It must, therefore, have been in him 
a degree of passionate frenzy bearing down every atom of his reason, 
You will not wonder that I cannot think on the subject without horror 
still.” 

On the other hand, it is said that besides an exposure of the body to 
prove that the death was natural, a detailed statement was published by 
the relations of the deceased, satisfactorily explaining all the circum- 
stances which led to the suspicion; but after diligent inquiry I have not 
been able to procure a copy of it. 

Adolphus, in his History of thé Reign of George III., gives the fol- 
lowing account of Charles Yorke’s appointment and his death, without 
hinting at the current rumour: 

«¢ The Seal was taken from Lord Camden and offered to Mr. Yorke, 
who had twice filled the office of Attorney-General with the greatest 
reputation for talents and integrity. The unsettled state of parties and 
the gloomy complexion of affairs naturally occasioned him to feel con- 
siderable reluctance at undertaking the office at that particular time. 
Nothing, probably, would have overcome his repugnance but the ear- 
nest manner in which his acceptance of the Great Seal was pressed 
upon him by the King himself as most essential to his service. Thus 
urged, Mr. Yorke determined to obey the commands of his Sovereign 


LIFE OF LORD CHANCELLOR YORKE, 331 


without reversionary conditions or stipulations. He was immediately 
raised to the peerage by the title of Baron Morden, of Morden, in Cam- 
bridgeshire ; an honour he did not live to possess, as the patent was not 
completed before his death, which occurred three days after he received 
the Great Seal.””* 

But an express, and seemingly authentic, contradiction is given to the 
imputation of suicide by Craddock, a writer of credit, who, in his Me- 
moirs, twice touches upon the subject: ‘“‘ Mr. Sheldon,” says he, ‘‘ and 
his brother were very rich men. Mr. 8. married a relative of Mr. 
Charles Yorke, for a short time Lord Chancellor. Mr. Sheldon’s eldest 
son, through the Reverend Mr, Sparrow, of Walthamstow, became in- 
timate with me, and was frequently at my house in summer. After the 
dreadful death of Mr. Yorke, the newspapers more than hinted that he 
committed suicide, and this was mentioned at my table, not knowing 
Mr. Sheldon was his nephew. Mr. Sheldon replied to the gentleman, 
‘J pledge you my honour, my relative did not cut his throat. When 
Mr, Sheldon was out of the room, the gentleman regretted that he had 
mentioned the circumstance, but said he was utterly astonished at Mr. 
Sheldon’s denial. A gentleman then said, ‘I believe [ know the truth 
from Mr. Sheldon. After Mr, Charles Yorke left his Majesty, and had 
accepted the Seals, it was said Lord Rockingham and others expressed 
much resentment. Lord Rockingham, for himself, expressly denied 
that he said any thing. However, Mr. Charles Yorke went privately to 
his sideboard, and took out a bottle of some very strong liquor. He 
was subject to a severe stomach complaint. This liquor brought on 
violent sickness, and in the paroxysm he broke a blood-vessel. After 
his death he was laid out, and the neck exposed to several persons, pur- 
posely permitted to view the corpse.’ This, I rather think, was the 
whole truth.” + 

In a subsequent volume of his work, Craddock incidentally mentions 
“Mr. Yorke, who was afterwards, for a short time, Lord Chancellor ;” 
and then he adds, “ Having just alluded to the short life of the much- 
regretted Mr. Yorke after he was Lord Chancellor, I think it incumbent 
upon me to contradict the reported manner of his death, on the autho- 
rity of one of his own family. He certainly was much agitated, after 
some hasty reproaches that he received on his return from having ac- 
cepted the Seals, and he hastily took some strong liquor which was ac- 
cidentally placed near the sideboard, and by its occasioning great sick- 
ness, he broke a blood-vessel. The friend from whom I received the 
account assured me that he was present when the corpse was left openly 
in the chamber, that the attendants might gratify their curiosity, and 
see that his death could not be truly attributed to the direct means which 
had been so publicly and so confidently asserted.” $ 

* See Vol. i. I must observe, however, that the silence of this historian, notwith- 
standing his good information and general accuracy, is less to be relied upon in the 
present instance, as he confesses that he suppressed what would be hurtful to the 
feelings of George IfI.—such as his Majesty’s first attack of insanity in 1765, 


which rendered the Regency Bill necessary, Vol. i. 
t Crad. Mem. iv. 252. { Crad. Mem. v. 92. 


332 REIGN OF GEORGE IIL 


I must likewise observe, that in an able article on the * Life of the 
Honourable Charles Yorke,” published in the ‘* Law Magazine” so re- 
cently as the year 1843, the imputation is strenuously negatived, and 
this account is given of the event: ‘Stung with the coldness and re- 
proaches of his party after his acceptance of the Great Seal, Mr. Yorke 
returned home in a state of extreme agitation, and drank freely of some 
spirits, which, in conjunction with the nervous excitement, occasioned a 
violent paroxysm of sickness. In the throes of his illness, he ruptured 
a blood-vessel.” 

The charitable conclusion may, therefore, be drawn that the unfortu- 
nate Charles Yorke died from the accidental bursting of a blood-vessel, 
and that he is only to be blamed for a want of due firmness in not ad- 
hering to his engagements. 

Even those who think that the testimony that he died by his own 
hand preponderates, must pity while they condemn him, and must still 
regard his memory with respect. Heaven forbid that such an act 
should be justified or palliated ; but there is not in the annals of human 
error an instance of a violation of religious duty so mixed up with vir- 
tuous feelings, and so demonstrating the excess of noble qualities. His 
acceptance of the Great Seal was wrong, but did not proceed from sordid 
motives. He made no condition for pecuniary grants to himself, which, 
if he had asked them, would have been showered down upon him. Nor 
does he at all seem to have been seduced by the love of power or splen- 
dour. He quitted a strong and united party to join one that was crum- 
bling to pieces, and if he had survived he could hardly have expected 
long to enjoy his elevation. He was overpowered by royal blandish- 
ments, and a momentary mistake as to the duty of a good subject. But 
he was soon struck with deep remorse, and his love for honest fame 
was demonstrated by: his being unable to survive the loss of it. Many 
holders of the Great Seal, to obtain it, have disregarded engagements as 
binding, and violated principles as-sacred ; yet, having clutched it, have 
suppressed the stings of conscience and revelled in the fruits of incon- 
sistency and treachery. Such men who live without honour, and die 
a natural death without repentance, may have more to answer for in 
the sight of a just and merciful God, than he who, in the anguish of 
self-reproach, sought mistakingly by a voluntary death to make atone- 
ment for the offence which he had committed. 

All must join in admiring, without qualification, nearly every portion 
of-his prior career, The brilliant promise which he gave of proficiency 
in early youth, he fully realized in manhood. He is not of the same 
calibre as Lord Bacon, Sir Thomas More, and Lord Somers; but for 
the combination of professional knowledge, and liberal accomplishments, 
he is at the very top of the second class of English lawyers. As an 
advocate, as a law officer of the crown, and as a member of the House 
of Commons, he was almost equal to his father, and if he had enjoyed 
the good fortune to preside for twenty years on the bench, as his father 
did, { make no doubt that he would have rivalled his father’s fame as a 
magistrate. In literature, he was infinitely beyond him. [I have already 
shown that he was a very considerable master of English prose compo- 


LIFE OF LORD CHANCELLOR YORKE. 333 


sition,—having a style easy, elegant, and forcible,—and with much 
more of genuine Anglicism than we generally find at a time when the 


public taste was corrupted by the inversions and the measured senten- 
tiousness of Johnson. 


Dabbling in poetry, his efforts, perhaps, deserve only to be denomi- 
nated “ Vers de Société ;”—but I do not know any succeeding (as.there 


were few preceding Chancellors) who could have equalled the following 
specimens of them :— 


* Lines (in imitation of Pope) supposed to be addressed by a Lady deceased to the 
Author of a Poem in honour of her Memory. 


*Stript to the naked soul, escap’d from clay, 
From doubts unfetter’d and dissolv’d in day, 
Unwarm’d by vanity, unreach’d by strife, 

And all my hopes and fears thrown off with life, 
Why am I charm’d with friendship’s fond essavs, 
And, though unbodied, conscious of thy praise ? 
Has pride a portion in the parted sou] ? 

Does passion still the formless mind control ? 
Can gratitude outpant the silent breath, 

Or a friend’s sorrows pierce the gloom of death ? 
No! ’tis a spirit’s nobler taste of bliss 

That feels the worth it left, in proofs like this. 
Thou liv’st to crown departed friends with fame, 
And, dying late, shalt all thou gav’st reclaim.” 


“ To a Lady, with a Present of Pope’s Works. 

*'The lover oft, to please some faithless dame, 

With vulgar presents feeds the dying flame ; 

Then adds a verse, of slighted vows complains, 

While she the giver and the gift disdains, 

These strains no idle suit to thee commend, 

On whom gay loves with chaste desires attend ; 

Sure had he living view’d thy tender youth, 

The blush of honour and the grace of truth, 

Ne’er with Belinda’s charms his song had glow’d, 

But from thy form the lov’d idea flow’d: 

His wanton satire ne’er the sex had scorn’d 

For thee, by virtue and the muse adorn’d.” 


“ Stanzas in the Manner of Waller, occasioned by a Receipt to make Ink, given to 
the Author by a Lady. 
“Tn earliest times ere man had learn’d 
His sense in writing to impart, 
With inward anguish oft he burn’d, 
His friend unconscious of the smart. 


* Alone he pin’d in thickest shade, 
Near murmuring waters sooth’d his grief, 
Of senseless rocks companions made, 
And from their echoes sought relief. 


“Cadmus, ’tis said, did first reveal 
How letters should the mind express, 
And taught to grave with pointed steel 
On waxen tables its distress. 


“ Soon was the feeble waxen trace 
Supplied by ink’s unfading spot, 





334 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


Which to remotest climes conveys 
In clearest marks the secret thought. 


* Blest be his chemic hand that gave 
The world to know so great a good; 
Hard that his name it should not save 
Who first pour’d forth the sable flood. 


“Tis this consigns to endless praise 
The hero’s valour, statesman’s art, 
Historic truth and fabling lays, 
The maiden’s eyes, the lover’s heart. 


“This kindly spares the modest tongue 
To speak alond the pleasing pain ; 
Aided by this, in tuneful song, 
Fond vows the virgin paper stain.”* 


Charles Yorke was a member of the Royal Society, but though dis- 
tinguished in literature, I do not believe that he ever showed any taste 
for science. He always continued to delight in the society of men of 
letters, and was desirous of serving them. Hurd was indebted to him 
for promotion, as well as Warburton. He did not waste his time in field 
sports and frivolous amusements, All the leisure he could find from 
professional and political occupations, he allotted to intellectual pursuits 
and enjoyments, 

Although Horace Walpole spitefully says, “ Yorke was very ugly 
while he lived,”—according to his portraits, the likeness of him on his 
tomb, and a figure of him in wax, still preserved, his countenance was 
intellectual and pleasing. Though his features were plain, his smile is 
said to have been soft and captivating, and his eye and mouth, in par- 
ticular, indicated to a physiognomist his high mental qualities. He 
must have had much goodness of heart, for a numerous body of friends 
were very warmly attached to him. His untimely end caused a tre- 
mendous sensation in the metropolis, and political opponents joined in 
deeply deploring it. George Hardinge says,— I saw Lord Camden 
just after Mr. Yorke’s death, and I never in my life observed him so 
melancholy as that event made him. All their competitions and jea- 
lousies were at an end, and he lamented him in tears, and spoke of him 
with undissembled esteem.” 

I should have mentioned, that his remains were interred in the parish 
church at Wimple, where there is erected a splendid monument to him 
by Schremaker, bearing an inscription,—which, after stating his birth 
and earlier promotions, thus proceeds : 


“The Great Seal was delivered to him, January 17th, 1770, at a juncture very 
unfavourable for his accepting it. He died, after a short illness, on the 20th of that 
month. He possessed uncommon Endowments, natural and acquired; was a com- 
plete Master of his own Profession, as practised in both parts of the United King. 
dom; had an extensive knowledge of Polite Literature, and understood with accu- 





* See also “Ode to the Honourable Miss Yorke, on her copying a Portrait of 
Dante ;” Cooksey’s Life of Lord Hardwicke, 35; Annual Register, 1770. 
+ MS. Life of Lord Camden, 





LIFE OF LORD CHANCELLOR YORKE. 335 


racy the Modern as well as Antient Languages. His Style in Composition and 
Speaking was nervons, elegant, and clear, and his Invention and Learning often fur- 
nished him with arguments which had escaped the Ingenuity of others. He was 
heard with attention and conviction, both in the Senate and at the Bar. His 
Mind was of a humane and liberal turn; and both in his public and private Station, 
he always acted upon Principles of Virtue and Honour. With these ‘Talents and 
Qualities, we justly lament that the Public was deprived of his Abilities at a junc. 
ture when they might have been of the greatest use, and the Crown of his Service 
in a Station to which he had been long destined, and which he would have eminently 
adorned, 

“This Monument is erected to his Memory by his most affectionate and afflicted 
Brother, Puitie Earl of Harpwickr.” 


Considering that these are the sentiments of one who had so loved 
him from infancy, and so deeply lamented the close of his career, they 
are most solemn and affecting. . : 

Charles Yorke, from his life and from his death, will always be inte- 
resting in English history. ‘ His moral and intellectual worth, literary 
merits, legal renown, and more than all these, his gentle goodness and 
attaching qualities of heart, shed a calm and placid light, even at this 
interval of time, over his memory, like the pure ray of some distant 


star, which the mists, raised by earth, have for a time obscured from 
our view.”* 

The Great Seal, not having been put to the patent for creating bim 
Baron Morden before he expired, this peerage only reminds his descen- 
dants of the additional honours they might have acquired. His eldest 
son, soon after coming of age, represented the county of Cambridge in 
Parliament, till the death of his uncle, the second Earl! of Hardwicke, in 
1790, when he succeeded to all the honours and estates of the family, 
which he has transmitted to his son, the present worthy representative 
of Lord Chancellor Hardwicke and Lord Chancellor Charles Yorke. 


* Law Mag. No. Ixi. 95. 

t+ Ante, p. 155; Grandeur of Law, 66. There is a laboured panegyric on the 
subject of this memoir, which, coming from a very eminent lawyer who had fre- 
quently heard him plead at the bar, possesses sufficient interest to justify me in copy- 
ing it in a note, although it be written in a turgid and almost bombastic style: 
“That modern constellation of English jurisprudence, that elegant and accomplished 
ornament of Westminster Hall in the present century (1792), the Honourable 
Charles Yorke, Esq.; whose ordinary speeches as an advocate were profound 
lectures; whose digressions, from the exuberance of the best juridical knowledge, 
were illuminations ; whose energies were oracles; whose constancy of mind was 
won into the pinnacle of our English forum at an inauspicious moment; whose 
exquisiteness of sensibility at almost the next moment from the impressions of im- 
puted error stormed the fort even of his cultivated reason, and so made elevation 
and extinction contemporaneous! and whose prematureness of fate, notwithstanding 
the great contributions from the manly energies of a Northington and the vast 
splendour of a Camden, and notwithstanding also the accessions from the two rival 
luminaries which have more latterly adorned our equitable hemisphere (Thurlow 
and Wedderburn], cause an almost insuppliable insterstice in the science of English 
equity. ‘To have been selected as the friend of such a man was nearly instar 
omnium to an English lawyer. Even to be old enough to have received the impres- 
sions of Mr, Charles Yorke’s character as a lawyer from the frequency of hearing 
his chaste, delicate, and erudite expressions in the discharge of professional duty, is 


some source of mental gratification.”—Harerave’s Preface to Hale, p. clxxxi. 


336 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


CHAPTER CLIL. 


LIFE OF LORD CHANCELLOR BATHURST FROM HIS BIRTH TILL HE WAS 
MADE A PUISNE JUDGE. 


CoMPENSATION is sometimes made for a scanty share of natural 
abilities by great success in the world. Thus, justice is done to the 
individual, while the pride of rewarded genius is tempered, and a balm 
is applied to the wounded self-complacency of those who have been un- 
fortunate. For such wise purposes, Henry Bathurst, little qualified for 
any intellectual pursuit,—became a Member of the House of Commons, 
one of the twelve Judges, a Commissioner of the Great Seal, Lord 
Chancellor, Lord President of the Council, and an Earl,—and when he 
had been raised to the first magistracy in the kingdom, he retafhed that 
situation for a much longer period than More, Bacon, Clarendon, or 
Somers. To his credit be it remembered, that he reached such a height 
without a dishonourable action. The portion of plain common sense 
bestowed upon him was unmixed with any vicious propensity, and 
his career, if it was without brilliancy, was without reproach. The 
proximate causes of his success may be considered harmless manners, 
sober habits, family interest, and the mediocrity of his parts, which, 
preventing envy and jealousy, made him to be regarded with favour by 
men in power, and to be preferred to others who might have given 
trouble by entertaining an independent opinion, and who might from 
dependants have risen into rivals, It should likewise be borne in mind 
that, as far as the public could observe, he performed almost decently 
the duties of the offices in which to the surprise of mankind he was 
placed,—affording a memorable example of what may be accomplished 
by dull discretion.* 


This effort of an industrious black-letter conveyancer at fine writing was thus 
justly satirised in “The Pursuits of Literature :” 


“With Harerave to the Peers approach with awe, 
And sense and grammar seek in Yorke and law.” 


There is a disparaging character of Charles Yorke by Horace Walpole, to which, 
from the author’s prejudices against all the Yorkes, little weight can be given: 
“ Yorke’s speeches in Parliament had for some time, though not so soon as they 
ought, fallen into disesteem, At the bar his practice had declined from a habit of 
gluttony and intemperance, as I have mentioned. Yet as a lawyer his opinion had 
been in so high repute, that he was reported to have received 100,000 guineas in 
fees. In truth his chief practice had flourished while his father was not only Lord 
Chancellor, but a very powerful minister. Yorke’s parts were by no means shining, 
His manner was precise, yet diffuse; and his matter more sententious than instruc- 
tive. His conduct was timid, irresolute, often influenced by his profession, oftener 
by interest. He sacrificed his character to his ambition of the Great Seal, and his 
life to his repentance of having attained it.’—Mem. Geo. LIL, iv. 53. 

* “Have you not observed,” writes Swift to Bolingbroke,—*“ that there is a lower 
kind of discretion and regularity, which seldom fails of raising men to the highest 





LIFE OF LORD BATHURST. 337 


The subject of this memoir was the second son of Allen, Lord 
Bathurst, who acted a distinguished part in public life during four reigns, 
and is celebrated in prosaic verse by Pope, and in poetical prose by 
Burke. The family are said to have come from Germany, and to have 
resided at ‘“ Batters,” near Luneburg, from which originally they took 
their name. In coming to England they had a grant of a tract of forest 
land in Sussex, which was at first called “‘ Batters Hurst,” and then 
‘* Bathurst.” Their castle here was demolished, and they lost almost 
the whole of their property during the wars of the Roses, so that for 
some generations they fell into obscurity. But they were revived by 
commerce, and Sir Benjamin Bathurst, their chief in the reign of Wil- 
liam III., rose to be Governor of the East India Company, and treasurer 
of the household to Princess Anne of Denmark. 

Allen, the long-lived,—his son,—having studied at Trinity College, 
Cambridge, under the then Master, Dean Bathurst, his uncle, was re- 
turned to Parliament, when hardly of age, for the borough of Cirences- 
ter, and became a partisan of the Tories, As a reward for his services, 
he was raised to the peerage,—being one of the batch of twelve, made 
in 1711, to support the peace of Utrecht,—who, when they were intro- 
duced into the House of Lords, were asked in legal phraseology ad- 
dressed to a jury, ‘if they would speak by their foreman?” He con- 
tinued an active debater in that House above half a century,—almost 
invariably in opposition to the successive Whig administrations formed 
under the first two princes of the House of Brunswick. But he lived 
to see better times, when Tory ascendency was to be restored. In 
1757, he was appointed treasurer to George III., then Prince of Wales, 
and when that Sovereign came to the throne, although the venerable 
Tory Peer declined office on account of his infirmities, he had a pen- 
sion granted to him of 2000/,.a year, and he was in due time advanced 
to-an Earldom. He was spared to behold his son well stricken in years, 
sitting on the woolsack as Lord High Chancellor, being the only indi- 
vidual, except the father of Sir Thomas More, on whom such a felicity 
was ever conferred. But he was less distinguished as a statesman than 
as the intimate associate of Swift, Prior, Rowe, Congreve, Arbuthnot, 
Gay, Addison, and Pope,—still keeping up an intimate acquaintance 
with the most distinguished of the succeeding generation of men of 
letters. 

We have an interesting relation of the manner in which he became 
acquainted with the author of Tristram Shandy :—‘“ He came up to me 
one day,” says that lively writer, ‘as I was at the Prince of Wales’s 
court ;—‘ I want to know you, Mr. Sterne, but: it is fit that you should 
know also who it is that wishes that pleasure. You have heard of an 
old Lord Bathurst, of whom your Popes and Swifts have sung and 


stations in the court, the church, and the law? Did you never observe one of your 
clerks cutting his paper with a blunt ivory knife? Did you ever know the knife to 
fail going the true way? Whereas if he had used a razor or a penknife, he had 
odds against himself of spoiling a whole sheet. I have twenty times compared the 
- notion of that ivory implement to those talents that thrive best at court.” 


VOL. V. a 


338 REIGN OF GEORGE IIf. 


spoken so much. I have lived my life with geniuses of that cast, but 
have survived them ; and despairing ever to find their equals, it is some 
years since I have cleared my accounts and shut up my books, with 
thought of never opening them again. But you have kindled a desire 
in me of opening them once more before | die, which now I do; so go 
‘home and dine with me.’ This nobleman, I say, is a prodigy ; for at 
eighty-five he has all the wit and promptitude of a man of thirty; a 
disposition to be pleased, and a power to please others, beyond what- 
ever [ knew,—added to which, a man of learning, courtesy, and 
feeling.” 

The aged peer had indeed the most elegant tastes, and the most jovial 
manners,—offering a striking contrast to Henry, who was rather ab- 
stemious and sullen; insomuch that when, after supper, the son had 
retired, the father would rub his hands, and say to the company, 
‘“¢ Now that the old gentleman is gone to bed, let us be merry, and enjoy 
ourselves,” 

To him was inscribed Pope’s epistle “On the Use of Riches,” in 
- which he is thus addressed :— 


“The sense to value riches, with the art 
To enjoy them and the virtue to impart, 
Not meanly, not ambitiously pursued, 
Not sunk by sloth, nor rais’d by servitude ; 
To balance fortune by a just expense, 
Join with economy magnificence ; 
With splendour charity, with plenty health: 
O, teach us, Baruurst, yet unspoil’d by wealth! 
That secret rare between the extremes to move 
Of mad good-nature and of mean self-love.” 


But a more striking tribute to his memory is to be found in the 
famous speech delivered a few months before his death, by Burke, on 
Reconciliation with America.* The orator, with the imagination of a 
true poet, having drawn the attention of the House to the rapid growth 
of the colonies, and the respect with which, on account of their wealth 
and population, they ought to be treated, thus proceeded :—* Mr. 
Speaker, I cannot prevail upon myself to hurry over this great con- 
sideration. It is good for us to be here. We stand where we have a 
vast view of what is and what is past. Clouds, indeed, and darkness 
rest upon the future. Let us, however, before we descend from this 
noble eminence, reflect that this growth of our national prosperity has 
happened within the short period of the life of man. It has happened 
within sixty-eight years. There are those alive whose memory might 
touch the two extremities. For instance, my Lord Bathurst might re- 
member all the stages of the progress. He was in 1704 of an age at 
least to be made to comprehend such things. He was, then old enough 
acta parentum jam legere, et yue sit poterit cognoscere virtus. Sup- 
pose, sir, that the angel of this auspicious youth, foreseeing the many 
virtues which made him one of the most amjable, as he is one of the 


* This speech was delivered on the 22d of March, 1775, and he died the 15th of 
September following. 


LIFE OF LORD. BATHURST. 339 


most fortunate men of his age, had opened to him in vision that when 
in the fourth generation, the third prince of the House of Brunswick 
had sat twelve years on the throne of that nation which (by the happy 
issue of moderate and healing councils) was to be made Great Britain, 
he should see his son, Lord Chancellor of England, turn back the cur- 
rent of hereditary dignity to its fountain, and raise him to a higher 
rank of peerage, whilst he enriched the family with a new one—If 
amidst these bright and happy scenes of domestic honour and prosperity, 
that angel should have drawn up the curtain and unfolded the rising 
glories of his country, and whilst he was gazing with admiration on the 
then commercial grandeur of England, the genius should point out to 
him a little speck, scarce visible in the mass of the national interest, a 
small seminal principle, rather than a formed body, and should tell him 
—‘ Young man, there is America—which at this day serves for little 
more than to amuse you with stories of savage men and uncouth man- 
ners; yet shall, before you taste of death, show itself equal to the 
whole of that commerce which now attracts the envy of the world. 
Whatever England has been growing to by a progressive increase of 
improvement, brought in by varieties of people, by succession of civil- 
izing conquests and civilizing settlements, in a series of seventeen hun- 
dred years, you shall see:as much added to her by America in the 
course of a single life!’ If this state of his country had been foretold 
to him, would it not require all the sanguine credulity of youth, and all 
the fervid glow of enthusiasm, to make him believe it? Fortunate man, 
he has lived to see it! Fortunate, indeed, if he lives to see nothing that 
shall vary the prospect, and cloud the setting of his day !” 

But, however reluctantly,—in obedience to my duty, I must now 
attend to a much less interesting character, and explain in what man- 
ner the most improbable part of the vision was realized. ‘“ The 
auspicious youth” was married to Catherine, daughter and heiress of 
Sir Peter Apsley, by whom he had four sons and five daughters.* For 
Henry, the second son, I must bespeak, during a short space, the pa- 
tience of the reader, although, as he had no striking qualities, good or 
bad, and as he met with no remarkable vicissitudes of fortune, .I cannot 
expect to excite in his favour the sympathy of any class of readers. 

He was born on the 2d of May, in the year 1714. I know not, and 
I must own I have not taken much pains to ascertain at what school he 
was educated. He probably passed through it with little flogging and 


* He was or pretended to be rather alarmed by the fecundity of his wife. Ina 
letter to Swift, alluding to the Dean’s scheme for relieving the miseries of the Trish 
by fattening their children for the table, he says: “I did immediately propose it to 
Lady Bathurst as your advice,—particularly for her last boy, which was born the 
plumpest and finest thing that could be seen; but she fell into a passion, and bid 
me send you word that she would not follow up your direction, but that she would 
breed him to be a parson, and he should live upon the fat of the land; or a lawyer, 
and then instead of being eat himself he should devour others. You know women 
in a passion never mind what they say; but as she is a very reasonable woman, I 
have almost brought her over now to your opinion, and have convinced her, that, as 
matters stood, we could not possibly maintain all the nine; she does begin to think 


_ it reasonable that the youngest should raise fortunes for the eldest.” 


340 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


little distinction. At the usual age he went to Christ Church, Oxford,— 
where nothing more is known of him than that he took his degree of B. A. 
in 1733. 

Being at this time a younger brother, he was destined to the bar, and 
he was entered of Lincoln’s Inn. The discipline there had become what 
it has since continued ; moots and readings having fallen into desuetude, 
and no other means of instruction substituted for them, the only qualifi- 
cation for being licensed as an advocate was—eating a certain number 
of dinners in the Hall. 

This curriculum being completed by Mr. Bathurst, he was called to 
the bar in the year 1786. He rode the Oxford circuit and sat in the 
Court of King’s Bench ; but although he was very regular in his habits, 
he seems to have had little business beyond a few briefs given him by 
favour. 

While still in his twenty-second year he was returned to serve for the 
family borough of Cirencester. It is said that a lawyer ought not to 
enter Parliament till he has fair pretensions to be made Solicitor-General ; 
but I do not believe that young Bathurst’s professional progress was at 
all impeded by his political pursuits, and without being in Parliament 
he probably would never even have had a silk gown. He sat in the 
House of Commons for Cirencester, and for the county of Gloucester 
from 1736 to 1751, a period of fifteen years—during the whole of which 
he is hardly ever mentioned as having taken part in debate. 

In 1741, he is said to have opposed the bill for forcibly manning the 
navy. His short speech is reported, and I suspect invigorated by Dr. 
Johnson, for it has the true Johnsonian flow: ‘Sir, that this law will 
easily admit, in the execution of it, such abuses as will overbalance the 
benefits, may readily be proved ; and it will not be consistent with that 
regard to the public, expected from us by those whom we represent, to 
enact a law which may probably become an instrument of oppression. 
The servant by whom I am now attended may be termed, according to 
the language of this bill, a sea-faring man, having been once in the West 
Indies; and he may, therefore, be forced from my service and dragged 
into a ship, by the authority of a justice of the peace, perhaps of some 
abandoned jobber, dignified with the commission only to influence elec- 
tions, and awe those whom excises and riot acts cannot subdue. | think 
it, sir, not improper to declare, that I would by force oppose the execu- 
tion of a law like this; that I would bar my doors and defend them; 
that I would call my neighbours to my assistance; and treat those who 
should attempt to enter, without my consent, as thieves, ruffians, and 
murderers,”* 

Though Mr. Bathurst spoke rarely, he was a constant attender in the 
House, and his vote might always be reckoned upon by the opponents 
of Sir Robert Walpole. He joined the Leicester House party, and in 
1745 was made Solicitor-General to the Prince of Wales, on which 


* 12 Parl. Hist. 93. He is represented as having said a few words on two other 
oceasions respecting this bill. (Ib. 105, 120.) 


LIFE OF LORD BATHURST. 341 


occasion, the rank of King’s counsel was conferred upon him, and he 
put on a silk gown. ; 

In 1749, he opposed the grant of an indemnity to the citizens o 
Glasgow for the loss they had sustained in the late rebellion, contending 
that they ought to have made a stouter resistance to the rebels, and that 
such indemnities would lessen the disposition to oppose foreign or domestic 
enemies—and pointing out the burning of Penzance by the Spaniards, in 
_ the reign of Elizabeth, and of Teignmouth, with all the ships in its har- 
bour by the French, in the reign of William III., when no compensation 
from Parliament was made to the sufferers, or asked by them.* The 
same session he spoke upon his favourite subject, the manning of the 
navy, condemning the plan brought forward by ministers for that pur- 
pose.t In 1750, he delivered a long oration about the demolition of the 
port of Dunkirk,.a favourite topic for the assailants of successive govern- 
ments for half a century. 

Meanwhile he continued steadily to attend the courts in Westminster 
Hall, and to go the Oxford circuit, though with little encouragement. 

While at the bar, he was engaged in one cawse célébre,—the trial, at 
Oxford, of Miss’Blandy for the murder of her father,—which he had to 
conduct for the Crown as the leader of the circuit. This is the most 
horrid parricide to be found in our criminal annals, and I hope it will 
remain for many generations without a parallel. Mr. Bathurst’s ad- 
dress to the jury has been much praised for its eloquence, PR 59 

das it certainly contains f of good feeling, if not of L UM, 
and as it certainly conta proo g g, 
high talent and refined taste, I have pleasure in copying the best passages 
of it. After making some observations upon the prosecution being car- 
ried on by order of the King, and upon the immense concourse of people 
assembled, he thus proceeded :—*“ Miss Blandy, the prisoner at the bar, a 
gentlewoman by birth and education, stands indicted for no less a crime 
than that of murder; and not only for murder, but for the murder of her 
own father, and for the murder of a father passionately fond of her ; un- 
dertaken with the utmost deliberation ; carried on with an unvaried steadi- 
ness of purpose, and at last accomplished by a frequent repetition of the 
baneful dose administered with her own hand. A crime so shocking 
in its own nature, and so aggravated in all its circumstances, as will 
(if she be proved to be guilty of it) justly render her infamous to the 
latest posterity, and make our children’s children, when they read the 
horrid tale of this day, blush to think that such a creature ever existed 
ina human form. I need not, gentlemen, point out to you the hein- 
ousness of the crime of murder. You have but to consult your own 
breasts, and you will know it. Has murder been committed? Who 
has ever beheld the ghastly corpse of the murdered innocent, weltering 
in its blood, and did not feel his own blood run slow and cold: through 
all his veins? Has the murderer escaped? With what eagerness do 
we pursue? With what zeal do we apprehend? With what joy do we 
bring to justice? And when the dreadful sentence of death is pro- 


* 14 Parl. Hist. 527. +14 Parl. Hist. 553, 557. t 14 Parl. Hist, 698, 


342 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


nounced upon him, every body hears it with satisfaction, and acknow- 
ledges the justice of the divine denunciation, that ‘ Who sheddeth man’s 
blood, by man shall his blood be shed.’ If this, then, is the case of any 
common murderer, what will be thought of one who has murdered her 
own father? who has designedly done the greatest of all human injuries 
to him from whom she received the first and greatest of all human be- 
nefits? who has wickedly taken away his life to whom she stands in- 
debted for life? who has deliberately destroyed in his old age him, by 
whose care and tenderness she was protected in her helpless infancy? 
who has impiously shut her ears against the loud voice of nature and 
of God which bid her ‘ honour her father,’ and instead of honouring him 
has murdered him?—TIn shortly opening the case, that you may the 
better understand the evidence, although I shall rather extenuate than 
aggravate, I have a story to tell which, I trust, will shock the ears of 
all who hear me. Mr. Francis Blandy, the unfortunate deceased, was 
an attorney-at-law, who lived at Henley, in this county. A man of 
character and reputation; he had one only child—a daughter,—the 
darling of his soul, the comfort of his age. He took the utmost care of 
her education, and had the satisfaction to see his cafe was not, ill be- 
stowed, for she was genteel, agreeable, sprightly, sensible. His whole 
thoughts were bent to settle her advantageously in the world. In order 
to do that, he made use of a pious fraud (if I may be allowed the ex- 
pression), pretending he could give her 10,0002. for her fortune. This 
he did in hopes that some of the neighbouring gentlemen would pay 
their addresses to her; for out of regard to him she was, from her 
earliest youth, received into the best company; and her own behaviour 
made her afterwards acceptable to them. But how short-sighted is 
human prudence! What was intended for her promotion, proved his 
death and her destruction.” He then went on to state the following 
facts :—Captain Cranstoun, an officer of the army, of a noble family in 
Scotland, but of a most profligate character, being stationed with a re- 
cruiting party at Henley,—for the sake of Miss Blandy’s expected for- 
tune, pretended to fall in love with her, and paid his addresses to her. 
She being soon deeply attached to him, accepted his offer, but the father 
positively refused his consent. The lovers then resolved to poison him 
—and Captain Cranstoun sent Miss Blandy some Scotch pebbles with a 
powder to clean them, which was white arsenic. To prepare the world 
for what was to happen, according to the superstition of the times, they 
had pretended to have heard supernatural music in the house, and to 
have seen an apparition which foreboded his death. She first adminis- 
tered the poison to her father in ffs tea, and when it caused him exqui- 
site anguish, and seemed to be consuming his entrails, she gave him a 
fresh dose of the poison in the shape of gruel, which she said would 
comfort and relieve him. As he was dying, the cause of his death was 
discovered and communicated to him. He exclaimed, ‘¢ Poor love-sick 
girl! what will not a woman do for the man she loves!” She said, 
“Dear sir, banish me where you will, do with me what vou please, so 
that you do but forgive me.” He answered, ** I do forgive you, but you 


LIFE OF LORD BATHURST. 343 


should, my dear, have considered that | was your own father; but, oh, 
that that villain, who hath eat of the best and drank of the best my house 
could afford, should take away my life and ruin my daughter!” She 
then ran for the paper containing the powder, and threw it into the fire, 
thinking it was destroyed; but it remained unconsumed, and produced 
her conviction. Upon this circumstance Mr. Bathurst observed, ‘¢ How 
evidently the hand of Providence has interposed to bring her to this 
day’s trial, that she may suffer the consequence. For what but the hand 
of Providence could have preserved the paper thrown by her into the 
fire, and could have snatched it unburnt from the devouring flame? 
Good God! how wonderful are all thy ways! and how miraculously 
hast thou preserved this paper, to be this day produced in evidence 
against the prisoner, in order that she may undergo the punishment due 
to her crime, and be a dreadful example to all others who may be 
tempted in like manner to offend thy Divine Majesty !” 

Some witnesses being called for the defence, Mr. Bathurst replied, 
and thus concluded: ‘“‘ Gentlemen, you are sworn to give a true ver- 
dict according to the evidence laid before you. If upon that evidence 
she appears to be innocent, in God’s name let her be acquitted. But if 
upon that evidence she appears to be guilty, I am sure you will do jus- 
tice to the public and acquit your own consciences,” 

There was a verdict of guilty on the clearest proof of premeditation 
and design; but (to show the worthlessness of the dying declarations of 
criminals, and the absurdity of the practice of trying to induce them 
to confess), she went out of the world with a solemn declaration which 
she signed and repeated at the gallows, that she had no intention of in- 
juring her father, and that she thought the powder would make him 
love her and give his consent to her union with Captain Cranstoun.* 

Mr. Bathurst continued leagued in politics with those who placed all 
their hopes of preferment on the accession of a new 
Sovereign, At the commencement of the session of aaa al 
1751, he opposed the address, and to recommend himself to the Prince, 
levelled several sarcasms at the King—sneering at the courtly lan- 
guage which the House was called upon to adopt :—‘* We must not,” 
said he, ‘express our acknowledgments to his Majesty without calling 
them our warmest acknowledgments ; we must not talk of his Majesty’s 
endeavours, without calling them his wawearted endeavours. Thus | 
could go on, sir, with my remarks through the whole of this address ; 
and all this without knowing any thing of the facts we thus so highly 
extol. How a minister might receive such high-flown compliments 
without knowledge, or how this House may think proper to express 
itself upon the occasion, I do not know; but I should be ashamed to 
express myself in such a manner to my Sovereign; nay, I should be 
afraid lest he should order me out of his presence for attempting to put 
upon him such: gross flattery.” t 

Frederick soon after dying suddenly, Mr. Bathurst went over, with a 


*18 St. Tr. 1118S—1194. + 14 Parl. Hist. 805. 


344 REIGN OF GEORGE IIilL 


4 number of his party, to the Court, and in conse- 
ery, Sanus quence he was, in 1754, made by Lord Hardwicke 
a Puisne Judge of the Court of Common Pleas. 


CHAPTER CLIII. 


CONTINUATION OF THE LIFE OF LORD BATHURST TILL HE RESIGNED 
THE GREAT SEAL, AND WAS MADE PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL, 


By reading, attendance in Court, and going the circuits, Mr. Justice 
Bathurst had picked up a little law without much practice: he had in- 
dustriously made a sort of Digest of the rules of evidence and the points 
generally arising at the trial of actions ;* he was quiet and bland in his 
manners, and he possessed a great share of discretion, which enabled 
him on the bench to surmount difficulties, and to keep out ‘of scrapes. 
With these qualifications he made a very tolerable puisne.| When 
sitting alone, he ruled points of law as rarely as possible, leaving them 
mixed up with facts to the jury ; and sitting in banc, he agreed with the 
Chief Justice and his brethren, or (if the Court was divided) with the 
Judge who was supposed to be the soundest lawyer.t Notwithstanding 
his Tory education and his attachment to the Government, he concurred 
in the judgment of Lord Camden for the liberation of Wilkes, and 
against general warrants, In a case in which it was held, that a bond 
in consideration of past cohabitation is good in law, he pleased the sanc- 
timonious by enriching his judgment with quotations from the books of 
Exodus and Deuteronomy, to prove that ‘* wherever it appears that the 
man was the seducer, a provision for the woman shall be upheld.”§— 
The murmurs against his appointment as a political job died away, and 
there was a still weaker Judge made after him to keep him in coun- 
tenance,|| 

But although people ceased to wonder that he had been put upon the 
bench as a puisne Judge, no one ever dreamed of his ever going higher. 
—A puisne Judge he did remain for fifteen long years, when, according to 
our modern system, he would have been entitled to retire on a pension. 
But nothing can be more fantastical than the distribution of prizes in the 
lottery of legal promotion, 

The triumph at Court on the acceptance of the office of Chancellor 


* This was afterwards enlarged by Mr. Justice Buller, and published under the 
name of Buller’s Nisi Prius. 

+ Walter Scott used to tell a story in point. The heir apparent of a considerable 
family in Scotland having been, though almost fatuous, called to the bar, and there 
being some talk in the servants’ hall about the profession of an advocate, an old 
butler exclaimed,—* it canna’ be a very kittle tred, for our young laird is ane.” 

¢ See Wilson’s Common Pleas Reports. 

§ Turner v. Vaughan, 2 Wils, 339. 

|| When Graham was made a Judge, Law, then at the Bar, said,—“ he puts Rook’ 
ona pinnacle.” Rook till then had been considered very incompetent. 


¢ 


LIFE OF LORD BATHURST. 345 


by Charles Yorke, was turned into deep dismay b ty 
his sudden death. The Great Seal Gi salahently Le Er abe 
pressed upon Sir Eardley Wilmot, Chief Justice of the Common Pleas, 
but he resolutely refused to accept it, partly from a dislike of politics, 
partly from disapprobation of the measures of the Government, and 
partly from considering how precarious must have been the tenure of 
his new office. A strong appeal was again made to Lord Mansfield, 
and he was implored,'by consenting to be Chancellor, to rescue the 
King from his difficulties, and to restore vigour to the Government, so 
much weakened by the secession of the Marquis of Granby, the Duke 
of Manchester, Dunning, and all the liberals who had gone out with 
Lord Camden ; but the wary Scot would not Icave his seat in the King’s 
Bench, which he so much adorned, and which he held for life. He 
advised that the Great Seal should be put into commission, and he con- 
sented to preside on the woolsack as Speaker of the House of Lords. 
This course was adopted.* 

A strange selection was made of Commissioners, which could not 
have been by his advice,—unless, indeed (as Was suggested), he wished 
them to be entirely under his own control—three puisne Judges, of fair 
character, but very moderate abilities and learning,—and almost entirely 
unacquainted with the practice of Courts of Equity—Sir Sidney Staf- 
ford Smythe from the Exchequer, Sir Richard Aston from the King’s 
Bench, and Jast and least—the Honourable Henry Bathurst from the 
Common Pleas.t The profession stood aghast at this arrangement, and 
the anticipation of failure was exceeded by the reality. 

The Court of Chancery had not been in such a state since Crom- 
well’s time, when the bench there was occupied by Masor Lisxix and 


* The difficulty of disposing of the Great Seal at this juncture led to the resigna- 
tion of the Duke of Grafton. After relating his fruitless negotiations, thus he ad- 
dresses his son Lord Euston: “ You will feel for me in this distressing dilemma : 
you will perceive that I had left nothing untried to bring the vessel to tolerable 
trim : and when you consider that, quitted by Lord Camden and at the same time 
by Lord Granby, I had no reliance in the cabinet but on General Conway only. I 
know you will think that, under such circumstances, I could not proceed and be of 
service to the King and to the country ; and recollect that the hopes of co-operation 
with Mr. Yorke to bring about an essential addition of ‘right principle, credit and 
support, vanished of course with himself. I laid before his Majesty directly my 
difficulties, and observed that they were such as compelled me to retire from my 
office, though it would be my full desire to give all assistance to his Majesty’s 


government.”—Journal. 
“ January 23, 1770. 


“Sir Sidney Stafford Smythe, Kt, ) a Baron of the Exchequer, 
Sir Richard Aston, K"t., a Judge of the King’s Bench, 
The H°", Henry Bathurst, a Judge of the Common Pleas, 
being by Letters Patent, dated the 215t Jany, 1770, appointed Commissioners for the 

_ Custody of the Great Seal of Great Britain, upon the 234 of the same month, came 
| into the Court of Chancery at West' Hall, and in open Court took the oaths of alle- 
giance and supremacy, and also the oath of office, the same being administered by 
the Deputy Clerk of the Crown,—Mr. Holford, the Senior Master in Chancery pre- 
sent, holding the book, Which being done, Mr. Attorney-General prayed that it 
pieht be recorded, which the Court ordered accordingly.” —Cr. Off. Min. B. No. 2, 
| Fol. 16. 






. 


346 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


Coronet Firnnes. No one of the three Commissioners had any con- 
fidence in himself or in his colleagues. In the regular hearing of causes 
they got on tolerably well by a mutual agreement to hold their tongues, 
and to consult Lord Mansfield as to the framing of their decrees; but, 
on “ Seal Days,” when they were peppered by motions to be disposed 
of at the moment, they could not conceal their consternation. A single 
incompetent Judge sitting by himself may take advantage of the tone 
of the counsel addressing him, of the countenance of the bystanders, 
and of hints from the officers; but the difficulties of the three Lords 
Commissioners were multiplied by their numbers, and the conflicting 
devices which they adopted to conceal their ignorance. 

In one easy case, which attracted much public notice, and in which 
they had the good luck to be unanimous, they gained a little éclat. The 
bill was filed by the celebrated Macklin against some booksellers, who 
employed Mr. Guerney, the short-hand writer, for the fee of one guinea, 
to go to the playhouse and take down from the mouths of the actors the 
words of his farce, entitled, ‘Love @ la Mode,” lately brought out upon 
the stage, but never printed. The copy thus obtained they were about 
to publish in the ** Court Miscellany, or Gentleman and Lady’s Maga- 
zine,” and a motion was made for an injunction to prevent them from 
doing so. The defendant’s counsel contended, that in such a case a 
Court of Equity ought not to interfere, but leave the plaintiff to his 
remedy at law, as he had lost all property in the piece by acting it, and 
he had not sustained, and he could not sustain, any damage, the repre- 
sentation on the stage being benefited rather than injured by additional 
publicity. But the Lords Commissioners, without hearing a reply from 
the counsel for the plaintiff, held that the acting was no publication to 
deprive him of his remedy, and Lord Commissioner Bathurst said :— 
‘“‘ The printing it before the author has printed it is doing him a great 
injury. Besides the advantage from the performance, he has another 
means of profit—and irremediable mischief is about to be done to his 
property. This is a strong case for an injunction.” Perpetual injunc- 
tion ordered.* 

But the solemn judgments of the Lords Commissioners, although sup- 
posed to be sanctioned by the authority of Lord Mansfield, were not 
always approved of, and they and he were particularly censured for a 
reversal of the decree of the Master of the Rolls in the great case of 
TorHILL v. Prrr.t This suit arose out of the will made: by Sir Wil- 
liam Pynsent, in favour of Mr, Pitt, as a mark of the testator’s sense of 
the patriotic services of “ the Great Commoner,” and involved the right _ 
to a considerable amount of personal property bequeathed to him along 
with the estate of Burton Pynsent. The case coming on at the Rolls 
before Sir ‘Thomas Sewell, a very eminent Equity Judge, he decided in 
favour of Mr. Pitt—on the clear and well-established rule of law, that 
‘“‘ where the words of a will give an express estate tail in a freehold, the 
same words applied to personalty, will give the whole interest—to avoid 


* Ambler, 694; See Murray v. Elleston, 5 B. & A. 737; Morris v. Kelly, 1 J. & 
W. 656. t+ Dickens, 431. 


+ 


LIFE OF LORD BATHURST. 347 

a perpetuity which the law abhors.” After this decree had been acqui- 
esced in for six years, an appeal was brought against it before the present 
Lords Commissioners of the Great Seal. I am wholly at a loss to ac- 
count for the reversal which they pronounced ; for [ utterly, and most 
seriously and unfeignedly, discard the notion which prevailed at the 
time, that they or their assessor must have been influenced by political 
enmity to the respondent. The reversal caused a burst of surprise, and 
he immediately appealed against it to the House of Lords, ‘The Judges 
being summoned gave a unanimous opinion in favour of the now ap- 
pellant, and with the concurrence of Lord Mansfield himself, the rever- 
sal was reversed, and the original decree was affirmed.* 

After the learned Trio had gone on for a twelvemonth, floundering 
and blundering, the public dissatisfaction was so great am 
that some change nie considered necessary. What Ere Meer e 
was the astonishment of Westminster Hall, and of the public, when it 
was announced that his Majesty had been pleased to deliver the Great 
Seal to the Honourable Henry Barnurst, a Judge of the Common 
Pleas, as Lord Chancellor, and to raise him to the peerage, by the title 
of Baron Apsley of Apsley, in the county of Sussex | 

It was thought vain again to solicit the acceptance of the Great Seal 
by any legal dignitary who -had already acquired judicial reputation, 
and there were then objections to introducing into the House of Lords 
‘the majestic sense of Thurlow, or the skilful eloquence of Wedder- 
burn.” Bathurst, from his birth and family connexions, was very ac- 
ceptable to the party in power; he was a man of inoffensive manners, 
and of undoubted honour and fidelity ; and his insignificance was.not 
disagreeable—being regarded as a guarantee that he would give no 
trouble in the cabinet. 

He was sworn in at a council at St. James’s the first day of Hilary 
Term. Two days after he led a grand procession x 

from his house in Dean Street to Wea tenihotes Hall, LAN go bt {hal 
attended by the great ‘officers of State, and many of the nobility, and 
he was duly installed in the Court of Chancery.f 


* Brown’s Parliamentary Cases, vii. 455. 

tT © 23d January, 1771. 

“ The Lords Commissioners for the custody of the Great Seal of Great Britain, 
having delivered the said Great Seal to the King at his palace of St. James’s 
on Wednesday the 234 of January, 1771, his Majesty, about one o’clock the same 
day, delivered it to Henry Bathurst, Es%, with the title of Lord Chancellor of Great 
Britain, who was thereupon, by his Majesty’s command, sworn of the Privy 
Council and likewise Lord High Chancellor of Great Britain, and took his place at 
the board accordingly. And on Friday the 25th of Jany, he went in state from his 
house in Dean Street to West" Hall, accompanied by Earl Gower, President of the 
Council, Earl of Suffolk, Lord Privy Seal, Earl of Hillsborough, one of the principal 
Secretaries of State, Marquess of Carnarvon, the Earls of Litchfield, Marchmont, 
_ Poulett, Strafford, the Lords Bruce and Boston, and Sir John Eardley Wilmot, K"*; 
_ where, in their presence, he took the oaths of allegiance and supremacy, and the 
oath of Lord High Chancellor of Great Britain, the Master of the Rolls holding the 
_ book, and the Deputy Clerk of the Crown reading the said oaths. Which being 
_ done, the Solicitor-General moved that it might be recorded, and it was ordered 
_ accordingly.”—Minute Book, No. 2, fol. 18, 


‘ 






348 REIGN OF GEORGE IIL. 


His proper title in the peerage at this time was Lord Apsley, and so 
continued till the death of his father in 1775, when his elder brother 
having previously died without issue, the earldom of Bathurst descended 
upon him; but I shall use the freedom to denominate him Lord Bathurst 
from the commencement of his Chancellorship. 

Many thought that he must now entirely break down; but, on the 
contrary, he got on tolerably well. The Chancery galley was less un- 
steady than when ¢hree unskilful pilots were employed at the helm. 
There was entire confidence placed in the new Chancellor’s integrity 
and earnest desire to do what was right; the Attorney and Solicitor- 
General who practised before him were desirous of supporting him, and 
he himself, placing just reliance on the liberality and honour of the 
Chancery bar, acted on the belief that there would be no gross attempt 
made to. mislead him. In weighty cases he was in the habit of calling 
in the assistance of Common Law Judges, and being governed by their 
advice. 

He likewise leaned constantly on Sir Thomas Sewell, the Master of 
the Rolls—never showing any arrogance or false pretension. In one 
important cause, having required the inferior Judge to sit as assessor, 
and heard his opinion, he said, with disarming candour: “I ought to 
apologise for keeping the matter so long before the Court ; at first I dif- 
fered in opinion with his Honour, but he hath now convinced me, and 
I entirely concede to his Honour’s opinion, and am first to thank him 
for the great trouble he hath taken on the occasion.” 

Still the appointment was justly complained of as resting on political 
convenience, without regard to the interests of the suitors. As long as 
Lord Bathurst held the Great Seal deep grumblings were uttered—and 
bitter sarcasms were levelled against him. 

In all companies was repeated the saying of Sir Fletcher Norton, 
who when he heard of Lord Commissioner Bathurst being declared: Lord 
High Chancellor, exclaimed, ‘*‘ What the three could not do is given to 
the most incompetent of the three!” 

Sir Charles Hanbury Williams inserted the new Chancellor in the 
band of ‘Tories who 


“Were curs’d and stigmatis’d by power, 
And rais’d to be expos’d.” 


Stories were invented and circulated respecting the Chancellor, which 
showed the low estimation in which he was held. It was said that his 
Lordship, on Wilkes being elected Lord Mayor of London, had threat- 
ened, in the exercise of the royal prerogative, when the profligate 
patriot was presented for confirmation, to disallow the choice of the 
citizens,—till told that this would be Wilkes’s reply: ‘I am fitter for 
my office than you are for yours, and I must call upon the King to 
choose another Lord Chancellor.”—Again, when he got into a contro- 
versy with a soldier’s widow, about a spot of ground at Hyde Parke 
Corner, and she having filed a bill against him, he gave her a sum of 
money to relinquish her claim, a witty barrister was represented to 


7 


} 







LIFE OF LORD BATHURST. 349 


have observed, “here is a suit-by one old woman against another, and 
the Chancellor has been beaten in his own Court!” 

There is a passage in Boswell’s Life of Johnson, which shows still 
more strikingly the opinion of well-educated men upon this subject. 
The biographer having mentioned the introduction of Sir Alexander 
Macdonald to the Lexicographer, in the year 1772, thus proceeds: 
“‘ Sir Alexander observed, that the Chancellors in England are chosen 
from views much inferior to the office, being chosen from temporary 
political views.”—Jounson. ‘¢ Why, sir, in such a government as ours, 
no man is appointed to an office because he is the fittest for it, nor 
hardly i in any other government; because there are so many connex- 
ions and dependencies to be studied. A despotic prince may choose a 
man to an office merely because he is the fittest for it.” Such a con- 
versation would not have occurred during the Chancellorship of Lord 
Hardwicke or Lord Somers.* 

I give one other testimony from a popular work published shortly 
before the close of Lord Bathurst’s career as Chancellor :—* He tra- 
velled all the stages of the law with a rapidity that great power and in- 
terest can alone in the same degree accelerate. His professional cha- 
racter in his several official situations-was never prominently conspi- 
cuous, till that wonderful day when he leaped at once. into the foremost 
seat of the law. Every individual member of the profession stood 
amazed; but time, the great reconciler of strange events, conciliated 
matters even here. \t was seen that the noble Earl was called upon 
from high authority to fill an important office, which no other could be 
conveniently found to occupy. Lord Campen had retired without any 
abatement of rooted disgust, far beyond the reach of persuasion to re- 
move. The great Cuartes Yorks, the unhappy victim of an unworthy 
sensibility, had just resigned the Seals and an inestimable life together : 
where could the eye of administration be directed? The rage of party 
ran in torrents of fire. The then Attorney and Solicitor-General were 
at the moment thought ineligible. Perhaps, too, the noble Lord then at 
the head of affairs, and who was yet untried, had a policy in not for- 
warding transcendent abilities.to obscure his own. Every such appre- 
hension vanished upon the present appointment. This man could raise 

* no sensation of envy as a rival, or fear as an enemy.” 

Strange to say, he continued in the office of Lord Chancellor between 
seven and eight years. We have a very imperfect record of his judi- 
cial performances during this period. His reporters are Ambler and 
Dickens, and both together hardly give more space to the whole of his 
Chancellorship than is occupied by a single term of Lord Eldon or 
_ Lord Cottenham. He does not seem to have settled any point of much 
importance, and I can only find one case of general interest which 
- came before him.—The widow of Philip Stanhope having sold to Dods- 
_ ley, the bookseller, for 15002., * Lord Chesterfield’s Letters to his Son,” 


% Boswell, ii. 160. 


+ Strictures on. Eminent Lawyers, p. 76; Ambler, from p. 696 to p, 772; 2 
|. Dickens, from p. 432 to p, 544. 


‘ 
| 








350 REIGN OF GEORGE IIL. 


which were advertised for publication, the executors of Lord Chester- 
field, who was lately deceased, filed a bill for an injunction. The de- 
fendant first insisted that a person to whom a letter is written, or his 
representatives, may publish it without, or against the consent of the 
writer or his representatives, and then tried to make out that at any 
rate in this case the late Lord Chesterfield, having recovered back some 
papers which he wished to burn, had expressly given permission to Mrs. 
Stanhope to make what use she pleased of those letters written by him 
to her late husband, after she had observed to him that ‘they would 
make a fine system of education if published,” and that the only objec- 
tion he offered was, ‘that there was too much Latin in them.” But 
“the Lorp CHANCELLOR was very clear that an injunction ought to be 
granted: ‘That the widow had no right to print the letters without the 
consent of Lord Chesterfield or his executors: That she had obtained 
neither the one nor the other: That Lord Chesterfield, when he de- 
clined taking the letters and said she might keep them, did not mean to 
give her leave to print and publish them. He cited the case of Mr. 
Pope’s letters to be published by Curl, and Lord Clarendon’s Life ad- 
vertised by Dr. Shebbeare.” Injunction ordered till hearing, but re- 
commendation given to the executors to permit the publication in case: 
they saw no objection to the work, on having a copy of i delivered to 
them.* 

The letters were published accordingly, and, upon the whole, there 
would have been ground for lamentation if they had been suppressed. 
Upon them chiefly depends the literary reputation of Lord Chesterfield, 
and notwithstanding the noted ‘saying of Dr. Johnson concerning the 
‘“‘ morals” and ‘* manners” which they teach, and although they are dis- 
figured by passages highly exceptionable, they contain many useful ob- 
servations on life, and they may be turned to good advantage in the 
education of youth. |Our indignation against the writer is much Soft- 
ened by considering the characteristic faults of his son, to whom they 
were addressed.t P 

* Ambler, 737; Thompson and others, executors of the Earl of Chesterfield, v. 
Stanhope and Dodsley. 

t Lest I should be supposed to give any countenanee to the fashionable immo- 


rality to be found in these letters, I copy for the benefit of my young readers the 
epigram describing their result :— 


** Vile Stanhope—Demons blush to tell— 
In twice two hundred places 
Has shown his son the road to hell, 
Escorted by the Graces. 


“* But little did th’ ungenerous lad 
Concern himself about them ; 
For base, degenerate, meanly bad, 
He sneak’d to hell without them.” 


And I will give as an antidote the touching exhortation of my countryman Burns. 


“ The sacred lowe o” weel-plac’d love 
Luxuriantly indulge it; 
But never tempt th’ illicit rove, 
Tho’ nothing should divulge it. 


LIFE OF LORD BATHURST. 851 


Without able assistance, Lord Bathurst would have made sad work 
of the appeal business in the House of Lords. He had never been en- 
gaged in a Scotch case, and was utterly ignorant of Scotch law, so as 
not to know the difference of a holding @ me from a holding de me; and 
the solemn decisions of the fifteen Judges of the Court of Session were 
to be reviewed by him. But Lord Mansfield, taking compassion upon: 
his destitute condition, or influenced by a regard for the credit of the 
Government or the interests of justice, attended the hearing of these 
cases, and they were very satisfactorily disposed of. 

The only very important English case which he had to deal with in 
the House of Lords was one in which he could not conveniently lean 
on Lord Mansfield; as it was a writ of error from a judgment of the 
Court of King’s Bench on the grand question of literary property. But 
the twelve Judges were called in, and adopting the opinion of a majority 
of them, “that authors have now no property in their works except 
what the legislature confers,” the Chancellor had an easy task to per- 
form in moving a reversal. ‘‘ Having declared that he was wholly un- 
biassed, he entered into a very minute discussion of the several citations 
and precedents relied upon at the bar; and, one by one, described their 
complexion, their origin, and their tendency ; showing that they were 
foreign to any constructions which would support the respondents in 
their arguments. He then gave a history of the bill passed in Anne’s 
reign for the protection of literary property, which, he said, was drawn 
up by the advice of Swift and Addison; and concluded with declaring, 
that he was clearly of opinion with the appellants.”* ‘The reversal was 
carried,—after a long debate, however,—several lay peers and bishops 
taking part in it on opposite sides. 

The only other important judicial proceeding in which Lord Bathurst 
was concerned is the trial of the Duchess of 
Kingston, before the House of Lords, for bigamy. La cag tog ae ua 
The offence being in point of law felony, he was, on this occasion, 
created Lord High Steward, and Westminster Hall was fitted up with 
as much grandeur as when Charles I. was tried there before Lorp 
Prestipenr Brapsuaw and the “ High Court of Justice,”—although, 

in this instance, it was known that a conviction could only lead to an 
admonition, ‘that the lady should not do the like again.’ 

When she first appeared at the bar, and courtesied to the Peers, his 
Grace the Lord High Steward thus addressed her: ‘“‘ Madam, you 

stand indicted for having married a second husband, your first husband 
being living. A crime so destructive of the peace and happiness of 
private families, and so injurious in its consequence to the welfare and 
good order of society, that by the statute law of this kingdom it was 
for many years (in your sex) punishable with death ; the lenity, how- 


“ T waive the quantum of the sin, 
The hazard of concealing ; 
But, oh ! it hardens a’ within, 
And petrifies the feeling.” 


* 17 Parl. Hist. 1001, 1400. 





352 RBIGN OF GEORGE IIL. 


ever, of later times has substituted a milder punishment in its stead.* 
This consideration must necessarily tend to lessen the perturbation of 
your spirits upon such an awful occasion. But that, Madam, which 
next to the inward feelings of your own conscience, will afford you 
most comfort is, reflecting upon the honour, the wisdom, and the can- 
dour of this high court of criminal jurisdiction. It is, Madam, by your 
particular desire that you now stand at that bar. In your petition to 
the Lords, praying for a speedy trial, you assumed the title of Duchess 
Dowager of Kingston, and you likewise averred that Augustus John 
Hervey, whose wife the indictment charges you with being, is at this 
time Earl of Bristol. On examining the records, the Lords are satisfied 
of the truth of that averment, and have accordingly allowed you the 
privilege you petitioned for, of being tried by your peers in full Parlia- 
ment; and from them you will be sure to meet with nothing but jus- 
tice, tempered with humanity.” 

The great question was, whether a sentence of the Ecclesiastical 
Court, which had been obtained, adjudging that there had been no prior 
marriage, was binding upon the House of Lords in this proceeding ? 
This having been most learnedly and ably argued by Thurlow and 
Wedderburn on the one side, and Wallace and Dunning on the other, 
the Lord High Steward, by the authority of the House, submitted it to 
the Judges. ‘They gave an opinion in the negative, and the trial was 
ordered to proceed. 

It was then proved by the clearest evidence that the Duchess, when 
Miss Chudleigh and a maid of honour, had been secretly married to 
the Honourable Mr. Hervey, at that time a Lieutenant in the navy, now 
Karl of Bristol, and that they lived together some days and nights, 
although afterwards, repenting of what they had done, they collusively 
tried to have the marriage declared null in the Ecclesiastica! Court ; 
and that she had afterwards been married to Evelyn Pierrepont, Duke 
of Kingston. The Lords unanimously found her guilty—one Lord 
adding—‘ erroneously, not intentionally.” Lord High Steward: 
‘** Madam, the Lords have considered the charge and evidence brought 
against you, and have likewise considered of every thing which you 
have alleged in your defence ; and upon the whole matter their Lord- 
ships have found you guilty of the felony whereof you stand indicted. 
What have you to allege against judgment being pronounced upon you ?” 
She, having prayed the privilege of the peerage, to be exempt from 
punishment, and after argument, a resolution being passed that she was 
entitled to it, the Lord High Steward said to her: ‘* Madam, the Lords 
have considered of the prayer you have made, and the Lords allow it. 
But, Madam, let me add, that although very little punishment, or none 


* Formerly women were hanged for all clergiable felonies, however trifling, be- 
cause they could not plead that they were clerks. 

+ The difficulty would be to try for bigamy a lady married to a peer, whose 
first alleged husband was and continues a commoner. Quacumque via data she 
must be acquitted, for if there was no prior marriage she is innocent; and if there 
was, the second marriage is void, so that she is no peeress, and the Lords have no 
jurisdiction. 


LIFE OF LORD BATHURST. 353 


can now be inflicted, the feelings of your own conscience will supply 
that defect. And let me give you this information, likewise—that you 
can never have the like benefit a second time, but another offence of 
the same kind will be capital, Madam, you are discharged, paying 
your fees.” 

His Grace then broke his white wand, and dissolved the Commis- 
sion. In this solemn farce, which amused et Sa 
the town for three days, he was allowed to IY SOL SAR Re 
have played the easy part of Lord High Steward very creditably.* 

Lord Chancellor Bathurst made no attempt to amend the law, or to 
reform the abuses of the Court of Chancery; but all notion of legal 
reform had disappeared during the last half of the eighteenth century ; 
and it is a curious fact, that no general order was made by any Chan- 
cellor from Lord Hardwicke down to Lord Loughborough.t 

Lord Bathurst was a member of the cabinet which originated and 
carried on the most important and the most disastrous war in which 
this country was ever engaged—the war with our American colonies, 
by which the empire was dismembered ; but I do not believe that he 
was answerable for any of the imprudent measures of Lord North’s 
administration, except by assenting to them. He probably took no 
active part in the discussions of Council respecting conceliation or co- 
ercion, and when blood began to flow, he offered no opinion respecting 
the manner in which the war should be conducted. Even in Parlia- 
ment he very rarely spoke, except on some subject connected with the 
law; and unlike Lord Camden and some other lawyers, who have 
greatly extended their oratorical fame when placed among the Peers, 
he seems never to have been well listened to in either House. 

His maiden speech as a Lord was in defence of the Royal 
Marriage Act, which was framed exactly as we now see it under the 
directions of King George III., and which, although several of his 
ministers disapproved of ‘It, his Majesty was resolutely determined to 
carry through without any alteration, so that his family might not again 
be degraded by misalliances—as he thought that it had lately been. 
Lord Bathurst, although when Attorney-General to Frederick Prince of 
Wales, his master being at variance with George II., he had seen great 
reason to doubt the asserted authority of the King respecting the mar- 
riage of his descendants, now, as Chancellor to. George III., had all 
his doubts cleared up, and thus in answer to the Marquis of Rocking- 
ham he addressed their Lordships: “1 confess, m : y 
Lords, that I had a share in hentioe this bill, ae [Marcu 2,1772.] 
I should be unworthy of the situation which I have the honour to fill if 
I were not prepared to justify every clause, every word, and every 
letter in it; and I am free to confess that I will not give my consent to 
any amendment whatever that may be proposed to it. Better than 
» alter it, throw it out. But your Lordships will see its importance to the 
state. The King’s right to the care of the royal family, and the appro- 


* 20 St. Tr. 355—651. + See Beames’s Orders. 
VOL. Vv. 23 


354 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


bation of their marriages, rests on the public good, and cannot be 
doubted. As to who are the royal family, all the descendants of George 
Il. are ;—and so is the Prince of Wales. They are paid out of the 
civil list, and therefore they are of the royal family. If any inconve- 
nience arise, Parliament will take care to remedy it a hundred years 
hence. The power may be abused; but so may all power. It is not 
against religion to annul marriages—as we know by the general Mar- 
riage Act from which the marriages of the royal family are excluded, 
The public necessity now requires that they should be regulated, and no 
mode would be effectual, other than that which this bill prescribes.”’* 

At the commencement of the new Parliament in November, 1774, a 
scene was enacted which must have afforded some amusement to those 
who recollected Sir Fletcher Norton’s biting sarcasm upon the appoint- 
ment of Bathurst as Chancellor. The same Sir Fletcher Norton being 
elected Speaker of the House of Commons, had to appear before the 
same Chancellor at the bar of the House of Lords to * disqualify him- 
self,” and to pray that the Commons might be directed to make a wor- 
thier choice. However, this was not the occasion to retaliate, and the 
Chancellor, in expressing his Majesty’s approbation of the choice of the 
Commons, declared that ‘no person in Mr, Speaker’s situation ever 
stood less in need of apology.” 

In the course of the same session, the Chancellor supported the bill 
for cutting off the commerce of the rebellious provinces in America with 
the rest of the world,t and the measure of sending Hanoverian troops to 
Gibraltar and Minorca, the legality of which turned on the just con- 
struction of the “¢ Act of Settlement.’’§ 

The Americans having now declared their ‘* Independence,” and there 

~~ _ being flagrant war with them, a great difficulty arose as to the 
LApPaddidels] treatment of pri f y US i fe still sai 
prisoners taken by us in battle. We still said 
they were the Azng’s suljects who were guilty of * levying war against 
him in his realm.” Butif so, they ought immediately to have been brought 
to trial for high treason, and they could not legally be detained in custody. 
To have treated them as prisoners of war would have been to acknowledge 
the authority of Congress as the legislature of a separate state. ‘To have 
executed them as ¢raztors would not only have been contrary to the 
rules laid down by jurists, respecting the mode of conducting a contest 
which assumes the aspect of civil war, but would inevitably have led to 
retaliation, there being many ‘ loyalists” in the power of the ‘ rebels.” 
To extricate the government from this dilemma, the Chancellor brought 
in “ A Bill to suspend the Habeas Corpus Act with respect to his Ma- 
jesty’s subjects taken fighting against him in America ;”—whereby 
power was given to detain them in custody without bringing them to 
trial. He said, ‘if ever there was a bill that deserved the appellation 
of humanity it was this. It was certainly necessary that some punish- 
ment should be inflicted on persons taken in the act of enmity against 
us; but what ought it to be? Since it was plainly not expedient that 


* 17 Parl. Hist. 389. + Ib. 32. 
t Ib. 456. § Ib. 815. 


LIFE OF LORD BATHURST. 355 


they should be discharged, and not politic, from the apprehensions 
of retaliation, to put them to immediate death, what was the alterna- 
tive? In his opinion, the only just medium had been adopted—that of 
preserving them till the conclusion of the war—so that their offence 
might still be visited upon them without endangering the lives of our 
fellow-subjects now in a similar situation in America.”* The bill 
passed, though strongly opposed by the Duke of Richmond and other 
Peers, 

Lord Bathurst was always desirous of getting up Lord Mansfield to 
defend the government, and of avoiding a personal conflict with Lord 
Camden ; but in the session of 1778 he was driven to give his opinion in 
favour of the legality of a plan which ministers had adopted of allowing 
regiments to be raised and maintained by individuals without the authority 
of Parliament,—contending that, although the “ Bill of Rights” declared 
that “to keep up a standing army in time of peace was contrary to 
law, this not being a time of peace, the provision did not apply to it.” 
Lord Camden was now very severe upon him, insisting “that the ar- 
guments in support of the measure from the woolsack would lead to the 
utter subversion of the constitution, and that to raise troops without the 
consent and during the sitting of Parliament was not only illegal and 
unconstitutional, but a violation of the fundamental privileges of Par- 
liament.” The subject was resumed on a subsequent day, when Lord 
Camden reiterated his doctrine, but the Lord Chancellor did not venture 
again to take the field against him.t 

After the calamitous surrender of General Burgoyne and his army 
at Saratoga, the Earl of Thanet having produced in the House of Lords 
a letter to him from the victorious American General F ae 
Gates, recommending peace between the two anes saaibticeh et 

2 ba) 

tries, and having moved that it should be laid upon the table, ‘the 
Lord Chancellor asked their Lordships if it could possibly be deemed 
right to accept a letter which held out such terms as were not only ex- 
ceedingly unequal, but grossly insulting? What! acknowledge the 
independency of America! and withdraw our army and our fleet! Con- 
fess the superiority of America, and wait her mercy! He desired the 
House to consult their own feelings for an answer.”t The motion, 
though supported by the Duke of Manchester and the Duke of Grafton, 
was negatived without a division. 

Soon after, the Chancellor showed that he could be excited by great 
provocation, and that, with a larger stock of moral [Marcu 31, 1778.] 
courage to support him, he might have made a 


* 19 Parl. Hist. 52, 561. + 19 Parl. Hist. 625. 

t Ib. 734, 742, Notwithstanding this public declaration which the Chancellor 
considered it his duty to make in Parliament, it appears from letters which I have 
seen, but which I am not at liberty to make public, that on the 9th of December, 
1777, he had strongly expressed his private opinion to Lord North on the necessity 
of opening a negotiation with the Americans for the acknowledgment of their inde- 
pendence, and that he had subsequently tendered his resignation because his advice 
was rejected. This correspondence is very creditable to Lord Bathurst, and shows 
that he was much respected by his colleagues. 


356 REIGN OF GEORGE Iil 


better figure in life. The Earl of Effingham, making a motion for 
papers respecting the public expenditure, and anticipating the rejection 
of it, declared “ that if the proofs of the extravagant and wasteful con- 
duct of administration were denied him there, he would take care to 
produce them elsewhere. The public had & right to know in what 
manner their money was spent, and he would furnish them with infor- 
mation. It was in vain, he saw plainly, to attempt in that House to 
move for anything which the ministers were not willing to give. In 
the present instance, the first Lord of the Admiralty knew his strength 
in a division. He would go below the bar, and take with him his—he 
had like to have said—servile majority ; he should not, therefore, rest 
satisfied, but would use proper means to come at the truth, which he 
would certainly communicate to the public.” 

The Lord Chancellor, leaving the woolsack 7 great warmth, thus 
spoke: ‘* My Lords, I feel myself called on to support the honour of 
the House. If such language is allowed to pass unnoticed, your Lord- 
ships will no longer be moderators between the King and the people. 
The noble Earl has talked of a serwzle majority ; are your Lordships 
to be so grossly insulted without even administering a rebuke? I have 
sat in this House seven years, and never before heard so indecent a 
charge—a servile majority! The insinuation is not warrantable. I, 
for one, have been in the habit of voting for the measures of Govern- 
ment; but will any noble Lord venture to say that I am under undue in- 
fluence? The Ministers of the Crown know that the place I hold is no 
tie upon me; they know that I always act freely according to my con- 
science, I was born heir to a seat in this assembly ;* I enjoy a peerage 
by hereditary right. I could not therefore sit silent and hear the noble 
Karl talk of a servele majority. 1am amazed that the members of the 
Government should so long have suffered themselves patiently to be 
traduced. In future I hope they will know how to check such a strain 
of invective. The ministry, my Lords, will always have a majority,— 
they being independent and the majority independent,—for the moment 
that the opposition have a majority, the ministry will be no more.”t+ So 
great was the superiority of Members which the government still com- 
manded, that Lord Effingham, to conceal the weakness of his party, 
suffered the motion to be negatived without a division. 

I mention with great pain Lord Bathurst’s next public exhibition, 
for hitherto he has appeared, if not a bright, a worthy and amiable 
man. After the glorious death of Chatham, which caused such public 


* This is not strictly correct, although the peerage had been conferred upon his 
family three years before his birth, as he was a younger brother, till he had reached 
manhood. I have known a few and a very few peers who have gained distinction 
though born toa peerage,—the late Lord Holland, the present Lord Stanley, and 
others, might be held out as examples—but almost all the peers who have displayed 
much energy and talent in my time, have either themselves been created peers, or 
were born before their fathers were created peers, or had begun their career as 
younger brothers, The res angusta domi is not so hard to struggle with as the 
enervating influences of wealth and high position without the necessity for ex. 
ertion, 


+ 19 Parl. Hist. 995. 


LIFE OF LORD BATHURST. 357 


enthusiasm, and extinguished all enmity against him in almost every 
bosom,—insomuch that King George III. himself professed to be friendly 
to the making of some provision for his family,—when the bill for 
this purpose, which passed with much applause through the Com- 
mons, came up to the Lords, the Lord Chancellor (Lam afraid from an 
illaudible desire to please the Court) did his best to throw it out, and 
opposed it in a most unfair manner, by pretending that, although purely 
a money bill, it might be properly amended by their Lordships. ‘The 
deceased Earl’s services,” said he, ‘* when actually minister, | will not 
depreciate: but they were sufficiently rewarded. A few years after he 
accepted the high post of Privy Seal, with great emoluments, at a time 
when it was well known his bad state of health rendered it impossible 
for him to assist his Majesty’s councils.” Having drawn an invidious 
comparison between Lord Chatham and the Duke of Marlborough, al- 
though himself one of the ministers who had wasted so many millions 
in the fruitless contest with America, he meanly resorted to the cant 
that “this was not a proper time to be lavish of the people’s 
money.” <‘ But,” he added, ‘‘ what operates powerfully with me against 
the bill is, that the provision is for the family of him who is supposed 
to have done the services.. Why was not the reward given to him in 
his lifetime? Because the answer would have been, ‘ he has had re- 
ward enough already from what his Sovereign has done for him.’ | 
never can agree, that by either rejecting or amending a money bill, we 
invade the privileges of the other House, for we are as much trustees 
for the people as the Commons. The King has assented to the bill ; 
but, addressed as he was by the other House, he was in a great mea- 
sure obliged to assent—and we cannot suppose that his Majesty will be 
offended by our exercising our right to reject or amend it. The grant 
did not spontaneously come from the Crown, as it ought to have done, 
and would have done, if there had been any ground for it. Before I 
conclude, I must use the freedom to declare, that | see no cause to 
despond because the Earl of Chatham is no more. There still remain 
as firm well-wishers to their country, and men ag capable of doing it 
real service.”* [ have shown in the life of Lord Camden, the merited 


* The Earl of Chatham is dead, but Earl.Bathurst survives!!! At any rate our 
Chancellor thought it was fitter to imitate the King of England than the King of 
Scotland. 


_ “ This news was brought to Edinburgh, 
Where Scotland’s King did reign, 
That brave Earl Douglas suddenly 
Was by an arrow slain. 


“O heavy news, King James did say ; 
Scotland can witness be, 
I have not any Captain more 
Of such account as he. 


“ Like tidings to King Henry came 
Within.as short a space, 
That Percy of Northumberland, 
Was slain in Chevy Chase. 


— 398 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


chastisement inflicted upon the author of this most ungracious and 
foolish effusion.* 

Lord Bathurst’s last speech in the House of Lords as Chancellor, 

i was In opposition to a motion of the Duke of Bolton, 
LAE ae tag for an address to his Majesty, ‘‘ to implore him that 
he would be graciously pleased to defer the prorogation of Parliament 
until the present very dangerous crisis may be happily terminated.” 
This was warmly supported by Lord Camden, who drew a most melan- 
choly picture of the state to which the country had been reduced by 
the misconduct of ministers, and forcibly pointed out the necessity of a 
change both of measures and of men to preserve our national inde- 
pendence. 

The Chancellor followed, and attempted to answer him, but seems to 
have entirely failed, if he did not actually break down. He confined 
himself to some technical remarks on the mode in which Parliament 
may be summoned at common law and by the statute, and on the in- 
convenience which would be felt if the two Houses were merely to ad- 
journ, instead of being prorogued. The motion was negatived by a 
majority of 42 to 20, but the opposition Peers being triumphant in the 
debate, it was thought indispensable that the Government should be 
strengthened in the House of Lords. ; 

The following day the prorogation took place, and as soon as the 

ceremony was over, a Council was held at St. James’s, 

[Junz 8, 1778.] when the Great Seal was surrendered by Lord Bathurst, 

and was delivered to Thurlow, the Attorney-General, as Lord Chan- 
cellor, the Ex-chancellor being declared President of the Council. 

This proceeding seems to have been very precipitate: it was not ac- 
companied with any other changes, and I am unacquainted with its 
secret history. One would have expected that having tided over the 
session, Lord Bathurst, notwithstanding his inefficiency, would have been 
allowed to retain his office till after the long vacation, and till Parliament 
and the Court of Chancery were to meet again in November. He had 
not had any difference with Lord North, or any of the other ministers, 
and they were conscious that he had done his best to serve them. I 
suspect that, from the approaching war against France and Spain, and 
the questions which were anticipated with neutral powers, some advice 
was required in the cabinet upon international law, which might be 
given in a bolder tone, and acted upon with more confidence. It is very 
much to be deplored that, when the disputes with the colonies were 
ripening into civil war, and when sound constitutional councils might 
have saved the state, there sat in the cabinet one of the weakest, though 
one of the worthiest, of our Chancellors. 

His most meritorious act while he held the Great Seal (which I have 


“ Now, God be with him, said our King, 
Sith ’twill no better be: 
I trust I have within my realm, 
FIvE HUNDRED As GOOD AS HE.” 


* Ante, p. 248, 


LIFE OF LORD BATHURST. 359 


much pleasure in commemorating)—was his giving spontaneously a 
commissionership of bankrupts to Sir William Jones,—still, notwith- 
standing brilliant talents and stupendous acquirements, struggling with 
pecuniary difficulties, Soon after Lord Bathurst’s resignation, came 
out the “* Translation of the Orations of Iseous,” dedicated to the Ex- 
chancellor. The dedicator, a little at a loss for topics of public com- 
mendation, dexterously takes shelter under the supposed modesty of his 
patron, and, preserving at once a character for gratitude and for sin- 
cerity, contents himself with saying: ‘‘ I check myself, therefore, my 
Lord, with reluctance, and abstain from those topics to which the over- 
flowing of my zeal would naturally impel me; but I cannot let slip the 
opportunity of informing the public, who have hitherto indulgently ap- 
proved and encouraged my labours, that although I have received many 
signal marks of friendship from a number of illustrious persons to 
whose favours I can never proportion my thanks, yet your Lordship 
has been my greatest, my only benefactor; that, without any solicita- 
tion, or even request on my part, you gave me a substantial and per- 
manent token of regard, which you rendered still more valuable by your 
obliging manner of giving it, and which has been literally the sole fruit 
that I have gathered from an incessant course of very painful toil.” 
While Lord Bathurst held the Great Seal, an attempt was in vain 
made to corrupt him by a secret offer to Lady Bathurst of three thou- 
sand guineas for the living of St. George’s, Hanover Square. The 
offer was traced to the famous Dr. Dodd, then a King’s Chaplain, and 
he was immediately dismissed from that situation. This Chancellor is 
allowed to have disposed of his’ church patronage very creditably, al- 
though on one occasion he incurred considerable obloquy by conferring 
a chaplaincy on Martin Madan, the translator of Juvenal, whose 
heterodox opinions and indifferent morals were then generally notorious, 
and who afterwards gave such serious offence to the Church by the 
publication of his “ Thelyphthora” in favour of the doctrine of 


polygamy.* i 


CHAPTER CLIV. 


CONCLUSION OF THE LIFE OF LORD BATHURST. 


Lory Batnurst continued President of the Council nearly four 
years, till the formation of Lord Rockingham’s administration—when 
he resigned with Lord North. During this disastrous interval, although 
he was still a member of the cabinet, he did not take a leading part in 
public affairs, and he seldom opened his mouth in the House of Lords, 
—Thurlow, his successor, treating him with very little consideration or 


* Lives of Eminent English Judges, p. 36. 


360 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


courtesy. In 1779 he made a speech in defence of the management of 
Greenwich Hospital, when he was very roughly handled by Lord Cam- 
den, but rescued by Lord Mansfield.* Soon after he came forward to 
resist the Duke of Richmond’s motion about the Civil List Expenditure, 
contending that, ‘if a system of economy was to be adopted, it should 
not begin with the Crown, the splendour of which should be maintained 
by an ample revenue for the honour and dignity of the empire.” 
In the following session, government being hard pressed upon the 
a occasion of Lord Shelburne’s motion for an address 
[Marcn 6, 1780.] i ueaMahes ; Be os 
o his Majesty praying to be informed ‘“ by whose 
advice the Marquis of Carmarthen and the Earl of Pembroke had been 
dismissed from the office of Lord Lieutenant by reason of their conduct 
in Parliament,”—Lord President Bathurst declared “he could say, 
with truth, that after upwards of thirty years’ public service, he did 
not know that he had ever made an enemy, or given just cause of 
offence, in any public character he had filled ; he disapproved of re- 
moving persons from their appointments under the Crown, except for 
misconduct or incapacity, but he thought the present motion highly objec- 
tionable, as it went to intrench on the King’s prerogative of choosing 
his own servants; this, like other prerogatives, might be abused, but it 
was necessary for the public good; and there was no pretence for say- 
[ ing that it had been abused in the present instance, as 
A.D. 1780.] th : paper : 
ere was nothing to distinguish the removals, which 
formed the subject of the present debate, from a continued stream of 
precedents since the Revolution down to the present day.” +t 
The Lord President was the organ of the government in the House 
of Lords respecting the proceedings to be taken in consequence of Lord 
George Gordon’s riots. On the 2d of June, 1780, their Lordships, in 
approaching Westminster Hall, were in serious danger from the vio- 
lence of the mob, and it was with the utmost difficulty, and after much 
ill usage, that they could force their way through Palace Yard. On 
their assembling in their own chamber, we are told by an eyewitness 
that “it is hardly possible to conceive a more grotesque appearance 
than the House exhibited. Some of their Lordships with their hair about 
their shoulders ; others smothered with dirt; most of them as pale as 
ghost in Hamlet, and all of them standing up in their several places, 
and speaking at the same instant; one Lord proposing to send for the 
guards; another for the justices or civil magistrates; many crying 
out,, Adjourn ! adjourn! while the skies resounded with huzzas, 
shoutings, hoofings, and hissings in Palace Yard. ‘This scene of un- 
precedented alarm continued above half an hour,” News was then 
brought that Lord Boston had been dragged from his coach, and was 
undergoing the most cruel ill usage from the rabble, who detained him 
a prisoner, 
Lord Bathurst showed great courage, and rose from the ministerial 
benches to implore order, and to make a regular motion,—but he could 


* 20 Parl. Hist.569. . t Ib. 1259. t 21 Parl. Hist. 225. 


LIFE OF LORD BATHURST. 361 


not procure a hearing. Lord Townshend offered to be one that would 
go in a body to the rescve of their brother peer. ‘The Duke of Rich- 
mond, however, as a piece of pleasantry—somewhat ill-timed—sug- 
gested that if they went as a house, the mace ought to be carried before 
the noble and learned Lord on the woolsack, who (the Bishops being 
excused) should go at their head, followed by the Lord President of the 
Council, the next in rank who could fight—Lord Mansfield then acting 
as Speaker in the absence of the Lord Chancellor, declared his readi- 
ness to do his duty. Just at that moment, Lord Boston [a. p. 1780 
entered with hair all dishevelled, and his clothes almost ** * ‘J 
covered with hair powder and mud, occasioned by the ill-treatment he 
had experienced. After some further tumultuous discussion, Lord 
Bathurst moved an adjournment, which was carried. The House gra- 
dually thinned, most of the Lords having either retired to the coffee- 
houses, or gone off in hackney-carriages, while others walked home 
under favour of the dusk of the evening—leaving Lord Mansfield, in 
the seventy-sixth year of his age, alone and unprotected, save by the 
officers of the House and his own servants, 

Next day, ‘‘ Earl Bathurst called the attention of the House to the 
great fall from dignity which their Lordships had suf: [June 8, 1780 
fered the preceding day, in consequence of the gross ; ‘J 
insults and violence offered to many of their Lordships’ persons by the 
rioters and unruly mob which had assembled in the streets, and not 
only interrupted the members of that House in their way to it, and pre- 
vented many from coming to do their duty in Parliament, but had 
obliged others, after a compulsory adjournment, to steal away, like 
guilty things, to save themselves from being sacrificed to lawless fury. 
Their Lordships had witnessed the insults and violence offered to the 
persons of several of their Lordships ; but others had been still greater 
sufferers; in particular,a right reverend Prelate (the Bishop of Lincoln) 
had been stopped in the street,—had been forced out of his coach,—the 
wheels of which were taken off,—and having sought refuge ina private 
house, had been followed by the mob, and had been obliged to make his 
escape in disguise. Before their Lordships proceeded to any other busi- 
ness, it behoved them to do something for the recovery of their dignity, 
by bringing the offenders to justice.” He concluded by moving an ad- 
dress to his Majesty, praying “ that he would give immediate directions 
for prosecuting in the most effectual manner, the authors, abettors, and 
instruments of the outrages committed yesterday in Palace Yard and 
places adjacent.” After a debate, in which the government was severely 
blamed for negligence, in not taking proper measures to secure the 
peace of the metropolis, the motion was agreed to. He [a. p. 1781.] 
afterwards moved that the Judges should prepare a bill 
‘*‘to indemnify sheriffs and gaolers for the escape of prisoners during 
the late tumults,”’ as these officers of the law were now liable for very 
heavy fines and punishments, without having been guilty of any negli- 
gence. ‘The bill was brought in, and passed without opposition,* 


* 21 Parl. Hist. 672—698. 


362 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


Lord Bathurst’s last considerable effort on the stage of public life, ap- 
[Jaw. 25, 1781.] pears to have been one of his best. In the debate re- 
specting the rupture with Holland, in answer to a vio- 
lent attack on ministers by the Duke of Richmond, he said ‘ that 
measures in support of the dignity of the Crown, the rights of Parlia- 
ment, and the national safety, were arraigned in the most indecent 
terms, and when all other means of defeating them failed, then noble 
Lords predicted national ruin, which they said was brought about by 
ministerial corruption. This he would never allow to pass by in silence, 
it being evidently the language of disappointed ambition, All their 
Lordships who supported the Government were involved in the general 
accusation, Was it possible to sit in the House, day after day, without 
feeling the strongest emotions of well-founded indignation? ‘The noble 
Lords to whom his Majesty had intrusted the direction of his affairs, 
were basely and unjustly vilified—their characters scandalously and in- 
decently traduced—charged with being wicked at one time, and inca- 
pable at another, according as it corresponded with the views, or 
answered the purposes of their accusers—as having entered into a con- 
spiracy against the liberties of their country, and leagued for its destruc- 
tion. He had for a long series of years served his Sovereign in various 
capacities, and he could lay his hand upon his heart, and with truth 
affirm, that he had ever acted for the good of his country according to 
the best of his abilities; and that there was nothing the Crown had to 
bestow which could induce him to give a vote contrary to his conscience. 
He had enough to put him above the poor temptations of patronage and 
emolument, and he believed there was not a single noble Lord who had 
supported the measures asserted to be carried by the mere force of cor- 
ruption, who did not act from motives equally honourable and consci- 
entious as himself. But it was plain whence all this arose—a wicked 
ambition—a lust of power—a thirst after the emoluments of office— 
from corruption—and the worst species of corruption, for it was in- 
curable—a corruption of the heart. Measures were opposed because 
they were said to be the King’s measures; ministers were traduced 
merely because they were ministers; the object of the opposition was 
to storm the Government, reckless of consequences—but what grieved 
him more than private persecution or public accusation, the dearest in- 
terests of the country were sacrificed in the conflict. He trusted, how- 
ever, that the good sense of the nation would see that such conduct 
flowed from party rage—the result of political despair and factious dis- 
appointment.” 

The Duke of Richmond retaliated, alluding to the time when Lord 
Bathurst was in opposition. ‘ The noble and learned Lord speaks from 
long experience. His early struggle was tedious and mortifying—full 
of disappointment, and clouded with despair. No man is a better judge 
of the various operations of the human mind under such circumstances, 
So he concludes that a wicked, corroding ambition, whetted and inflamed 
by unavailing attempts, and ending in a state of political despair, is ac- 
companied with malice and personal enmity, and ‘ that worst species of 


LIFE OF LORD BATHURST. 863 


corruption—a corrupt heart.’ But the noble and learned Earl is a Tory ; 
he was then in opposition to the Whigs. Whoever opposes hzs friends, 
whether in or out of place, must act from factious motives and a corrupt 
heart.” Lord Bathurst did not reply, nor afterwards venture to stand 
forward as the champion of the Court.* 

We next find him, while carrying through a Government bill for im- 

osing a stamp on almanacs, engaged in an alter- , 
ee with Thurlow. the Chancellor, who seems EA ro aE 
always to have thought that he had a privilege to oppose the measures 
of every government with which he was connected, and to assail any 
of his colleagues. The Chancellor complained bitterly of the manner 
in which the bill was worded, saying, that “‘ several clauses were con- 
tradictory and unintelligible.” 

The Lord President tried to explain and defend them, 

Lord Chancellor. “lam very sorry to say that the explanation of 
my noble and learned friend affords no satisfactory answer to my ob- 
jections. Indeed, | am so dull of apprehension as to be unable to un- 
derstand him. I do suspect, my Lords, that the framer of the first 
clause accidentally omitted the word ‘ not,’ and that he really meant to 
forbid the doing of the very thing which is here commanded.f It ap- 
pears to me a gross mistake, and I must beg your Lordships ‘ zot’ to 
give your sanction to nonsense.”—Lord President. ‘The proposed 
amendment of the noble and learned Lord on the woolsack would de- 
feat the whole object of the bill, which is sufficiently plain to those who 
are willing to discover it.” The Lord Chancellor attacked other clauses, 
but met with no support, and Lord Bathurst succeeded in carrying his 
bill without any amendment. 

Such conflicts shook an administration now tottering to its fall, Lord 
North, personally, had been for some time eager to withdraw, but was 
prevailed upon to retain office from the King’s insuperable dislike to the 
opposition leaders, and his threat to abandon England and the English 
crown rather than consent to the independence of America. At last the 
Government was in a minority in one house, and on a motion, of which 
notice had been given by Lord Shelburne, was threatened with the same 
fate in the other. ‘To avert the coming storm, Lord North announced 
that ‘his Majesty’s ministers were no more.” 

Lord Bathurst, always downright and sincere, did not, like Thurlow, 
ERED to continue in office with those to whom he [Marcu 19, 1782. 

ad been opposed on al] the most important princi- 
ples on which the state was to be governed, and instantly resigned with 
his chief, intending now to enjoy the repose of private life. ‘There was 
yet no Parliamentary allowance for Ex-chancellors, and [a. D. 1784,] 
he declined the grant of a pension. But he had been 


* 21 Parl. Hist. 1013. 

+ This reminds one of the proposal—for the purpose of making precept and faith 
square with practice—to take “ not” from the CommanpMENTs, and to put it into the 
CREED. 


t 22 Parl. Hist. 538-548, 


364 REIGN OF GEORGE III. ° 


able to procure a tellership-of the Exchequer and other valuable sine- 
cures for his son. 

During a few years following he occasionally attended in his place in 
the House of Lords, but he did not mix in the party contests which ensued, 
and he was never excited to offer his opinion on either side, by the ani- 
mated discussions on the Peace of Paris, on the Coalition between Mr. 
Fox and Lord North, on Mr. Fox’s India Bill, on the Regency Question, 
on the French Revolution, or on the commencement of the war with the 
French Republic, which he lived to see. 

stag He seems only to have spoken once after his retire- 
[Jury 3, 1783.] : : . 
ment from office—in opposing a bill for the relief of 
insolvent debtors—which, according to his narrow views, he considered 
unjust to creditors and ruinous to trade.* But it should be recollected 
that such notions were then very generally entertained, and that Mr. 
Burke, by condemning imprisonment for debt, was so far in advance of 
his age, that he was considered a dangerous innovator, and on this ground 
chiefly lost his election for the city of Bristol. 

Lord Bathurst spent his last years entirely in the country, and after 
a gradual decay expired at Oakley Grove, near Cirencester, on the 6th 
day of August, 1794, in the eighty-sixth year of his age. His remains 
were interred in the family vault there, and a monument to his memory 
was erected in the parish church, with this simple and touching inscrip- 
tion, which he himself had composed :— 


“In Memory of Henry Eart Baruorst, Son and Heir of Allen Earl 
Bathurst, and Dame Catherine, his Wife. 


*«« Fis ambition was to render himself not unworthy of such Parents.” 


Although of very moderate capacity, he always acted a consistent and 
honourable part, and never having deserted his principles or his party, 
or engaged in any unworthy intrigue to aggrandize himself—the blame 
cannot rest upon him that he was placed in situations for which he was 
incompetent. 

I hope I shall not be expected to enter into any analysis of his cha- 
racter as a judge, as a statesman, or an orator, for in his mental qualities 
and accomplishments he is really not to be distinguished from the great 
mass of worthy men who, when alive, are only known to their families 
anda small circle of friends, and who are forgotten as soon as the grave 
has closed over them. He is praised for his temperate and regular 
habits, and for the dignity and politeness of his manners. In public 
life (as he often boasted) he made no enemies, and in private life he was 
universally beloved. 

He remained a bachelor till forty, when he married a widow lady, 
who, in four years, died without bringing him any children, In 1759 
he took for his second wife, Tryphena, daughter of Thomas Scawen, 


* 23 Parl. Hist. 1100, 

+ Even when I was Attorney-General, and brought in a bill to abolish imprison. 
ment for debt, I was only able to carry it as to mesne process, leaving cases after 
judgment for subsequent legislation. 





LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 365 


Esq., of Maidwell, in the county of Northampton, and by her (besides 
other issue) had a son, Henry, the third Earl, a distinguished statesman, 
who ably filled high offices under George III. and under George IV., 
both as Regent and King. The Lord Chancellor Bathurst is now repre- 
sented by his grandson, Henry George, the present and fourth Earl.* 


CHAPTER CLY, 


LIFE OF LORD CHANCELLOR THURLOW FROM HIS BIRTH TILL HE WAS 
APPOINTED SOLICITOR-GENERAL, 


I now arrive at a remarkable era in my history of the Chancellors. 
I had to begin with some who “ come like shadows, so depart,” and who 
can only be dimly discovered by a few glimmering rays of antique light. 


“ Tbant obscuri sola sub nocte per umbram.” 


The long line that followed I have been obliged to examine through the 
spectacles of books.—With these eyes have I beheld the lineaments of 
Edward Lord Thurlow ; with these ears have I heard the deep tones of 
his voice. 
‘“ Largior hic campos ether et lumine vestit 
Purpureo ; solemque suum, sua sidera norunt.” 

Thurlow had resigned the Great Seal while J was still a child residing 
in my native land; but when I had been entered a few days a student 
at Lincoln’s Inn it was rumoured that, after a long absence from Parlia- 
ment, he was to attend in the House of Lords, to express his opinion 
upon the very important question, ‘‘ whether a divorce bill should be 
passed on the petition of the wife, in a case where her husband had been 
guilty of incest with her sister ?’—there never hitherto having been an 
instance of a divorce bill in England except on the petition of the hus- 
band for the adultery of the wife. 

When | was admitted below the bar, Lord Chan- 
cellor Eldon was sitting on the woolsack ; but he Neatesog chat ete las 
excited comparatively little interest, and all eyes were impatiently look- 
ing round for him who had occupied it under Lord North, under Lord 
Rockingham, under Lord Shelburne, and under Mr, Pitt. At last there 
walked in, supported by a staff, a figure bent with age, dressed in an 
old-fashioned gray coat,—with breeches and gaiters of the same stufl— 
a brown scratch wig—tremendous white bushy eyebrows—eyes still 
sparkling with intelligence—dreadful ‘* crows’ feet” round them—very 
deep lines in his countenance—and shrivelled complexion of a sallow 


* Grandeur of the Law, 70. I may be accused of having omitted to mention 
what is perhaps the most memorable act in the Life of Lord Chancellor Bathurst,— 
that he built Apsley House at Hyde Park Corner, now the town residence of the 


illustrious Duke of Wellington,—where stood the “ Hercules Pillars,” the inn fre- 
quented by Squire Western. 


366 LIFE OF 


hue—all indicating much greater senility than was to be expected from 
the date of his birth as laid down in the ** Peerage.” 

The debate was begun by his Royal Highness the Duke of Clarence, 
afterwards William IV., who moved the rejection of the bill, on the 
ground that marriage had never been dissolved in this country, and 
never ought to be dissolved, unless for the adultery of the wife,—which 
alone for ever frustrated the purposes for which marriage had been 
instituted. 

Lord Thurlow then rose, and the fall of a feather might have been 
heard in the House while he spoke. At this distance of time I retain 
the most lively recollection of his appearance, his manner, and his rea- 
soning. ‘I have been excited by this bill,” said he, ‘to examine the 
whole subject of divorce, as it has stood in all periods of time, and under 
all circumstances, Not only among civilised heathen nations, but by 
the Levitical law, and by the Gospel, a woman may be put away for 
adultery, and the remedy is not confined to the husband. The ecclesi- 
astical courts in this country having only power to grant a divorce @ 
mensé et thoro, the tie of marriage can only be dissolved by the legisla- 
ture ; and when an application is made to us for that purpose, we ought 
to be governed by the circumstances of each particular case, and ask 
ourselves, whether the parties can properly continue to cohabit together 
as husband and wife? Common law and statute law are silent upon the 
subject, and this is the rule laid down by reason, by morality, and by 
religion. Why do you grant to the husband a divorce for the adultery 
of the wife? because he ought not to forgive her, and separation is in- 
evitable. Where the wife cannot forgive, and separation is inevitable 
by reason of the crime of the husband, the wife is entitled to the like 
remedy. Your only objection is—mistrust of yourselves, and a doubt 
lest, on a future application by a wife, you should not conduct your- 
selves with sound discretion, Is such mistrust—is such doubt—a sufh- 
cient reason to justify a House of Parliament in refusing to put an end 
to a contract, all the objects of which, by the crime of one party, are 
for ever defeated? By the clearest evidence, Mr. Addison since the 
marriage has been guilty of incest with the sister of Mrs. Addison. 
Reconciliation is impossible. She cannot forgive him, and return to his 
house, without herself being guilty of incest. Do such of your Lord- 
ships as oppose the bill for the sake of morality propose or wish that 
she should? Had this criminal intercourse with the sister taken place 
before the marriage, the Ecclesiastical Court would have set aside the 
marriage as incestuous and void from the beginning; and is Mrs. Ad- 
dison to be in a worse situation because the incest was committed after 
the marriage, and under her own roof? You allow that she can never 
live with him again as her busband, and is she, innocent, and a model 
of virtue, to be condemned for his crime to spend the rest of her days 
in the unheard-of situation of being neither virgin, wife, nor widow? 
Another sufficient ground for passing the bill is, that there are children 
of this marriage, who, without the interference of the legislature, would 
be exclusively under the control of the father. Now, your Lordships 


LORD CHANCELLOR THURLOW. 367 * 


must all agree that such a father as Mr. Addison has proved himself to 
be, is unfit to be intrusted with the education of an innocent and virtuous 
daughter. The illustrious Prince says truly, that there is no exact 
precedent for such a bill; but, my Lords, let us look less to the exact 
terms of precedents than to the reason on which they are founded. ‘The 
adultery of the husband, while it is condemned, may be forgiven, and 
therefore is no sufficient reason for dissolving the marriage; but the 
incestuous adultery of the husband is equally fatal to the matrimonial 
union as the adultery of the wife, and should entitle the injured party 
to the same redress.” 

I cannot now undertake to say whether there were any cheers, but I 
well remember that Henry Cowper, the time-honoured Clerk of the 
House of Lords, who had sat there for half a century, came down to 
the bar in a fit of enthusiasm, and called out in a loud voice, * CarrraL ! 
Caprrau! Caprrat!” Lord Chancellor Eldon declared that he had 
made up his mind to oppose the measure, but that he was converted ; 
and Ex-chancellor Lord Rosslyn confessed that the consideration which 
had escaped him,—of the impossibility of a reconciliation,—now in- 
duced him to vote for the bill. Having passed both Houses, it received 
the royal assent, and has since been followed as a precedent in two or 
three other cases of similar atrocity.* 

Vidi Virgelium tanttm. I never again had an opportunity of 
making any personal observation of Thurlow, but this glimpse of him 
renders his appearance familiar to me, and [ can always imagine that 
I see before me, and that I listen to the voice of this great imitator of 
GARAGANTUA. 

I was struck with awe and admiration at witnessing the scene I have 
feebly attempted to describe; and I found that any of Thurlow’s sur- 
viving contemporaries with whom I afterwards chanced to converse, 
entertained the highest opinion of what they denominated his “ gigantic 
powers of mind.” I must confess, however, that my recent study of his 
career and his character, has considerably lowered him in my estima- 
tion; and I have come to the conclusion that, although he certainly had 
a very vigorous understanding, and no inconsiderable acquirements,— 
the fruit of irregular application,—he imposed by his assuming manner 
upon the age in which he lived,—and. that he affords a striking illus- 
tration of the French maxim—* on vaut ce qu’on veut valoir.” 

This personage—celebrated as a prodigy by historians and poets, in 
the reign of George IIE, but whom posterity may regard as a very or- 
dinary mortal—was born in the year 1732, at Bracon-Ash, in’ the 
county of Norfolk. His father, Thomas Thurlow, was a clergyman, 
and held successively the livings of Little Ashfield in Suffolk, and of 


* 35 Parl. Hist. 1429 ; Macqueen’s Practice of the House of Lords, 594. At the 
first public masquerade which I attended in London, which was soon after this, 
there was a character which professed to be Lorp CuanceLtor ‘THurLow—dressed 
in the Chancellor’s robes, band, and full bottom wig. I am sorry to say that, to the 
amusement of the audience, he not only made loud speeches, but swore many pro- 
fane oaths. 


2 


368 LIFE OF 


Stratton St. Mary’s, in Norfolk. The Chancellor himself never at- 
tempted to trace his line distinctly farther back than his grandfather, 
who was likewise a country parson,—although there was an eminent 
‘* conveyancer” whom he sometimes claimed as the founder of the 
family. He had a just contempt for the vanity of new men pretending 
that they are of ancient blood, and some one attempting to flatter him 
by trying to make out that he was descended from ‘THurRLoE, Crom- 
well’s secretary, who was a Suffolk man :—* Sir,” said he, ‘ there 
were two Thurlows in that part of the country, who flourished about 
the same time. Thurloe the secretary, and Thurlow the carrier. I 
am descended from the last.”* Nor could he boast of hereditary 
wealth, for his father’s livings were very small, and there were several 
other children to be regred from the scanty profits of them. Yet, per- 
haps, his situation by birth was as favourable as any other for future 
eminence. Being the son of a clergyman, he escaped the discredit of 
being ‘* sprung from the dregs of the people,” and he had as good an 
education as if he had been heir toa dukedom. For his position in 
society, and for his daily bread, he was to depend entirely on his own 
exertions.t His father used to tell his sons betimes, that he could do 
nothing for them after he had launched them in a profession. The old 
gentleman would then say (aside) to a friend, “I have no fear about 
Ned; he will fight his way in the world.” 

Of Ned’s early years, a few anecdotes have been handed down to us. 
It being known that on account of his lively parts: he was destined to be 
a lawyer, the Reverend W. Leach, whom he wa in the habit of visiting 
while a very young boy, said to him one day, ‘I shall live to see you 
Lord Chancellor,’—and forty years after obtained from him a stall 
at Norwich, and a living in Suffolk. 

He received his earliest instructions under the paternal roof, and was 
four years at a school at Scarning under a Mr. Brett.{ Here, according 
to the fashion of the age, the boys wore wigs, and Ned ‘Thurlow 

a (whether as an emblem of his future greatness I know 
[a. p. 1745.] . 7 ae . 
pot) having a full bottom one, used to put it into his 

pocket when he went to play. 

One of the amusements then encouraged at this and most other 
schools in England—now abolished for its cruelty—was ‘‘ cock-throw- 
ing.” By the kindness of the son of a schoolfellow of Thurlow,§ Iam 


* In the “ Peerages” there is a long pedigree given, tracing him up to a family 
of Thurlow, of considerable antiquity in the northern part of the county of Norfolk, 
in which, although I doubt not it is very authentic, the “ Carrier” does not appear, 
and with which therefore I do not trouble the reader. 

t I belong to a club of “ Sons of the Clergy of the Church of Scotland,” of which 
the late Dr. Baillie, Serjeant Spankie, and Wilkie the painter, were members. The 
last was our great ornament. I well remember a speech of his from the chair, in 
which he said,—* born in the manse, we have all a patent of nobility.” 

t That very eminent Judge and elegant scholar, Mr. Baron Alderson, was edu- 
cated at the same school, and remembers their great. pride when he entered, that 
they had produced a Chancellor. 

§ Charles Frederick Barnwell, Esq., of Woburn Place. 


LORD CHANCELLOR THURLOW. 369 


enabled to lay before the reader a copy of verses written by him on one 
of these “ gallicides.” Notwithstanding the inaccuracies with which he 
is chargeable, he must be allowed to display in this performance the 
vigour of mind which afterwards distinguished him, and it is impossible 
not to admire his patriotic fang at the French, with whom we were 
then at war, and his well-deserved compliment to the hero of Culloden. 


VOL. V. 


* GALLICIDIUM. 


“ Nyuruaax dom pulchram comitabar forte Belindam, 
— Gratia IC 2 quamque Cupido colit ; 


Ignotum valgus cerno, virosque duces. 

Jam magis atque magis populi erebrescere murmur, 
Et vox audita est plurima rauca sonans. 

Ut si quando Aquilo gelido bacchatus 2b Arcto 
(aubversis sy 


Horris 
At clamore novo ef magna perterrita turba, 
= mihi effagiens hee sua jussa dedit : 


unquam 
Hane gallum mitte ad littora dira Stygis.’ 
Nee plora effztus telam econtorsit, in 2uras 
It clamor feriens sidera summa poli. 
Jupiter ut quondam, mundi miseratus adusti 


eptanusque #quorl 
Fulmen im aurigam dextra libravit ab aure, ‘ 
Exeussitque rotis atque anima pariter ; 5 
Sic periens eecidit, viclento gallus ab ietu, 
Nee crura eversum dilacerata ferunt. 


370 LIFE OF ? 


Magnanimus populus victricia signa sequatur, 
Et letus repetat victor ovansque domum !’’* 


At Scarning, Thurlow seems to have been a great pickle, as well as 
[ 1746 to have shown some talent, for he was next sent to the 
es ‘J grammar school at Canterbury; and Southey, in his 


* The following is a translation of these verses by a very eminent alumnus of 
Scarning school :— 


“ COCK-THROWING AT SHROVE TIDE. 


““Wirn fair Belinda as I walk’d one day, 
Round whom young Love and all the Graces stray, 
She fair as Venus, who to Cyprus yields 
Her wish’d for presence, blessing all its fields, 
Where ruddy wines in rich libations flow, 
And fires of incense in her temples glow— 
We reach’d, by devious paths, an open ground, 
With grass and varied flowers enamell’d round. 
There roam’d a crowd at once of men and buys, 
All shouting out amain—an awful noise, 
Loud as when Aguilo his legions pours, 
Or Notus drowns the earth with pelting showers ; 
Whilst dark and darker still rush down the floods, 
Prone in confusion fall the crashing woods ; 
Old ocean foams beneath th’ astounding roar, 
And billowy mountains roll and beat the shore. 
Alarm’d, the Nymph at once in terror fied, 
But ere she vanish’d, thus to me she said: 
‘Go, sir, at once, and, if you can, find out 
What all this crowd and tumult is about.’ 
She spake—and J obeyed,—I sought the throng, 
And reached the open central space.—Ere long 
Tied by the leg a captive cock I spied, 
Who oft to use (in vain) his pinions tried ; 
Whilst near him stood, in Nature’s strength, a clown, 
Taught, by long use, the art of knocking down ; 
None e’er like him incarnadin’d with stains 
So many clubs, or spoil’d so many mains. 
He seiz’d a stick with wondrous skill prepar’d, 
And thus address’d it as his hand he bar’d :— 
‘ My trusty club, which never fail’d me yet, 
Fly swift, and let that cock his wages get.’ 
He spake and threw,—‘ ’Tis done,’ exclaim’d the clown; 
Shovted the crowd amaz’d,— He’s down, he’s down.’ 
As when old Jove his thunderbolts uprear’d, 
(’T'was time) when Sol’s ungovern’d son appear’d 
Through heaven and panting earth his car to wheel 
Till Neptune’s self, half-boil’d, began to squeal, 
Right on the lad’s doom’d head the lightnings beat, 
And he at once lost both his life and seat. 
So fell the cock beneath the heavy blow, 
His legs and spurs far scatter’d to and-fro. 
Thus may thy cocks, false recreant Gallia, fall, 
And thou, Old England, then be cock of all. 
Whilst Cumbria’s here still to conquest leads, 
And British soldiers emulate his deeds. 
Oh, may he soon recross the subject muin, ' 
And seek,—in triumph seek,—his home again !” 


LORD CHANCELLOR THURLOW. 371 


Life of Cowper, on the authority of Sir Egerton Brydges, accounts for 
this movement by narrating that Dr. Downe, his father’s friend, having 
a great spite against Mr, Talbot, head master of that school, with 
whom he had had a violent quarrel, recommended strongly that young 
Edward Thurlow should be sent to it,—his secret motive being that the 
hated pedagogue might have under his care ‘a daring refractory clever 
boy, who would be sure to torment him.”* At Canterbury, Thurlow 
remained some years. We are not told what pranks he played there, 
and [ rather suspect that this was his period of steady application,— 
when he acquired the greatest share of that classical learning for which 
he was afterwards distinguished. 

He was next sent to Caius College, Cambridge.t Here he affected 
the character of idleness, He was suspected of sitting 1748 
up at night to read, and in the mornings sometimes, [4. D. ‘] 
when pretending to be wandering about in the fields, he “ sported the 
oak,”§—shutting himself up to prepare for a college examination ;— 
but he eschewed the chapel and the lecture room, and loved to be seen 
lounging at the gates of his college, or loitering in coffee-houses, then 
frequented by the under-graduates, or figuring in a nocturnal sympo- 
sium, or acting as leader of the university men in the wars between 
“town” and ** gown.” His frequent breaches of academic discipline 
made him familiar with impositions, confinements within the college, 
privations of sizeings, and threats of rustication. He rather prided 
himself in such punishments, and, instead of producing reformation, 
they led to fresh offences. He was not more celebrated for his way- 
wardness in getting into-scrapes than for the talent he displayed in 
getting out of them; and he is reported to have often taken upon him- 
self the blame of acts in which he had no hand for the pleasure of ar- 
guing the case, and showing his ingenuity in justifying what he was 
supposed to have done. 

At last he was summoned before the Dean of his Colleze—a worthy 
man, but weak and formal—for non-attendance at chapel, and had an 
imposition set him—to translate a paper of the ‘* Spectator” into Greek. 


* Southey’s Life of Cowper, 23. 

+ Thurlow always spoke kindly of Talbot, but considered himself so barbarously 
used by Brett, that he fostered an inextinguishable hatred of him, While Attorney- 
General, going into a bookseller’s shop at Norwich, Brett followed him, and most 
obsequiously accosted him. ‘Thurlow taking no notice of him, Brett said,—‘ Mr. 
‘Thurlow, do you not recollect me ?”—Mr. Attorney-General, “Iam not bound to 
recollect every scoundrel who chooses to recollect me.” 

t By the kindness of the Rev. Dr, Chapman, the present Master of the College, 
I have been favoured with the following copy of his matriculation. 

Extract from the Matriculation Book of Gonville and Caius College, Cambridge, 
5th October, 1748.—“ Edwardus, filius Reverendi Thome Thurlow, Vicarii de 
Tharston, in Com. Norf. natus apud Braken in eodem Com. educatus per biennium 
in Acdibus paternis apud Taccleston, sub Magt® Browne, dein per quadrien in 
Schola publica apud Searning, sub Mag'® Brett, postremo in Schola publica Cantu- 
ariensi sub Mag'® Talbot, annos natus 17, admissus est Oct. 5, Pens. Minor sub 
tutela Magti Smith, et solvit pro ingress. 3s. 4d.” 

§ Locked the outer door of his rooms, 


372 . LIFE OF 


He duly performed the task, taking considerable pains with it ; but, in- 
stead of bringing his translation (as he well knew duty required) to the 
imposer, he intimated to him that he had delivered it to the College tutor, 
who had the reputation of being a good Grecian. ‘This Mr. Dean con- 
strued into an unpardonable insult, and he ordered the delinquent, as in 
cases of the gravest complexion, to be summoned before the Master and 
Fellows of the College. The charge being made and proved, Thurlow 
was asked what he had to say in defence or extenuation of his conduct ? 
‘Please your Worships,” said he, ‘no one respects Mr, Dean more 
than I do, and out of tenderness to him, I carried my exercise to one 
who could inform him whether I had obeyed his orders.” This plain 
insinuation that the Dean was little acquainted with the Greek tongue 
was the more galling as being known to be well-founded, and was con- 
sidered by him an enormous aggravation of the original injury. He 
denounced it asa flying in the face of all authority, and foretold that 
the discipline of the College was at an end if they did not now proceed 
with the utmost severity. In conclusion, he declared that “ rustecatzon 
would only be laughed at by the offender, and that expulszon was the 
only adequate punishment,” 

There was no denying that the offence was a serious one, but con- 
siderable sympathy was felt for the young gentleman, who, although his 
future greatness was little dreamed of, was known to possess social good 
qualities, and to evince excellent abilities when he chose to exert them, 
Tn mitigation, they likewise remembered the dash of absurdity about 
Mr. Dean which had often made him the butt of the combination room. 
In particular, Smith, the tutor (afterwards head of the house), put ina 
good word for the culprit, and, to avoid setting a brand upon him which 
might ruin him for life, proposed that he should be permitted to take 
his name off the College books, and that no other proceedings should 
be taken against him. Notwithstanding the stout resistance of the Dean, 
this suggestion was adopted. Thurlow gratefully acquiesced, and thus 
left Cambridge without a degree.* 

Notwithstanding bis irregularities, there can be no doubt that he de- 
rived great benefit from his residence there. He had occasional fits of 
severe application, and always having a contempt for frivolity, when he 
seemed to be idle, he was enlarging his stock of knowledge and sharp- 
ening his intellect by conversing with men of strong sense and solid 
acquirements. 


* In a communication respecting Lord Chancellor Thurlow, with which I have 
been honoured by Dr. Chapman, the present learned Master of Caius, after stating 
that the traditions respecting him at Cambridge had become very faint, he says: 
“T have always understood that, having set at defiance all college authority, it be- 
came necessary to send him away. I have searched our records, and can find no 
recorded charge against him, or any sentence passed upon him; so I conclude his 
friends were advised to take him from College. He was admitted Oct. 5, 1748, and” 
elected a scholar on Dr. Perse’s foundation Oct. 12, 1748; this he held till Lady- 
day, 1751, when his last stipend was paid him. I conclude, therefore, that his name 
was taken off our books about that time, as it does not appear in our list of scholars 
at Mich. 1751.” 


LORD CHANCELLOR THURLOW. 373 


Among the strange vicissitudes of life, it did so happen, that the re- 
fractory disciple, thus discarded from the bosom of Alma Mater, reached 
the highest civil dignity in the state; and it is pleasant to relate, that 
when presiding on the woolsack, he recollected the friendly interference 
of Dr, Smith, and caused him to be appointed Chancellor of the diocese 
of Lincoln. 

It is even said, that he afterwards handsomely made atonement to 
«Mr. Dean.” The story goes, that he had had an earlier quarrel with 
this functionary, who had interrupted him, rather sharply, with the ques- 
tion, ‘‘ Pray, sir, do you know to whom you are speaking?” bidding 
him to recollect that he was in the presence of no less a person than 
the Dean or THE Cottece. This hint was not lost upon Thurlow, 
who then, and ever after, began and interlarded every sentence he ad- 
dressed to him with the vocative, “Mr. Dean;” this banier being 
doubly galling to the assertor of the title, as he could not consistently 
appear to be offended by it. When the flippant youth, who had been 
so nearly expelled from his college, had a little while held the Great 
Seal, the individual who had proposed and pressed his expulsion, obey- 
ing a summons to wait upon him, the Chancellor’s first salutation to him 
was “‘ Mr, Dean, how d’ye do? [am very happy to see you, Mr. Dean.” 
‘*My Lord,” he observed, somewhat sullenly, “I am no longer Mr, 
Dean.” ‘That is as you please; and it shall not be my fault if the 
title does not still belong to you, for I have a deanery at my disposal, 
which is very much at your service, Mr. Dean.””* 

This generosity was very honourable to Thurlow, for (as he well 
knew) on his being made Chancellor, his College met to deliberate 
whether they should not congratulate him (according to custom) on his 
elevation,—when Dr. Smith, the Master, objected, saying, “that it 
would be an insult, under the circumstances attending his Lordship’s 
removal from College,”—and the proposal fell to the ground. 

His early destination for the bar remaining unaltered, he had been 
entered of the Inner Temple while an under-graduate at Cambridge, 
and as soon as he quitted the University he took chambers, and began 
to keep terms by eating a certain number of dinners in the hall; this, 
since the disuse of * moots ” and “ readings,” being the only curriculum 
of legal education in England. 

The voluntary discipline of a special pleacer’s office was not yet 
established, although Tom Warren, the grcat founder of the special 
pleading race, to whom I can trace up my pedigree, was then beginning 


* This anecdote, which has often appeared in print, is probably considerably em- 
bellished ; but so much I know, from undoubted private authority, that the Dean’s 
name was Goodrich; that he accepted a college living in Dorsetshire; that at the 
first visitation of the Bishop of Salisbury after Thurlow was Chancellor, Mr. Good. 
rich said to the Bishop, “I am sure I shall have some preferment from him, as I 
was the only fellow who dared to punish him ;” and that the Bishop, having men- 
tioned this to the Chancellor, the old Caius man exclaimed, “ It is true ! he is right, 
and a living he shall have !” 

t He is thus described. “ Edwardus Thurlow generosus, filius et heres appa- 
rens Thome Thurlow, de Stratton St. Mary, in comitatu Norfolk, Clerici.” 


374 LIFE OF 


to flourish.* The usual custom was to place the aspirant for the bar, 
as a pupil, in the office of a solicitor, where he was supposed to learn 
how actions were commenced and conducted, with the practice of the 
different courts of law and equity. For young Thurlow was selected 
the office of Mr. Chapman, a very eminent solicitor, who carried on 
business in Lincoln’s Inn. Here he met, as a brother pupil, the cele- 
brated William Cowper, author of the “ Task.” The poet contracted 
a great friendship for him, and introduced him to his cousin, Lady Hes- 
keth, who lived in Southampton Row, then a fashionable quarter of the 
town. ‘This gay house was much more agreeable to the taste of the 
brother-pupils than the smoky chambers of the attorney, smelling of 
musty parchment; and here they frivolously passed a great part of their 
time. Cowper, in a private letter written many years after, gives this 
account of their studies: ‘I did actually live three years with Mr. 
Chapman, that is to say, I slept three years in his house, but I lived, 
that is to say, I spent my days, in Southampton Row, as you very well 
remember. There was I and the future Lord Chancellor constantly 
employed, from morning till night, in giggling, and making others 
giggle, instead of studying the law.” 

Thurlow, while denominated “a student of law,” affected the character 
of an idler.t| He was fond of society ; without being addicted to habi- 


“4 I delight to think that my special pleading 


| father, now turned of eighty, is still alive, and 





Tom Warren. in the full enjoyment of his faculties. He 


lived to see four sons sitting together in the 
| House of Lords—Lord Lyndhurst, Lord Den- 

man, Lord Cottenham, and Lord Campbell. 

Serseant Runineron. | To the unspeakable advantage of having been 
three years his pupil, I chiefly ascribe my 

l success at the bar. I have great pride in re- 

| cording that when, at the end of my first 








| Tipp. 


year, he discovered that it would not be quite 
convenient for me to give him a second fee 
l of one hundred guineas, he not only refused 
to take a second, but insisted on returnin 
| g 
| Cidtetin me the first. Of all the lawyers I have ever 


known, he has the finest analytical head; and 





if he had devoted himself to science, I am 
| sure that he would have earned great fame 
as a discoverer. His disposition and his 
Dunpas, ° manners have made him universally beloved. 
now Solicitor-General. 


+ This affectation, which I believe has gone out of fashion like “ hair powder” 
and “ shorts,” survived to my time. I knew an exceedingly clever young man, who, 
having taken a high degree at Cambridge, in reality studied the law very assidu- 
ously, but who pretended to be idle, or to read only books of amusement. Reversing 
the practice of the hero of the PLeapEr’s Guipg, who, if “ Hawke” or “ Buzzard,” 
or any attorney was approaching, conveyed the object of his affections into the coal- 
hole, and pretended to be reading the “ Doctrina Placitandi,” my friend, who was 
in the habit of poring over “ Coke upon Littleton,” had a contrivance by which, on 
a knock coming to the door, this black-letter tome disappeared, and there was sub- 
stituted for it a novel, the name of which I may not mention. If he had lived he 
would have conquered all such follies ; but he was destined to an early grave. 


LORD CHANCELLOR THURLOW. 375 


tual intemperance, he occasionally indulged in deep potations ; and, al- 
though his manners were somewhat rough and bearish, as he had great 
powers of entertainment, his company was much courted by the loung- 
ers of the Inns of Court. Thus a good deal of his time was stolen from 
study, and he could not lay in such stores of learning as Selden and 
Hale, in the preceding century, — who for years together read sixteen 
hours a day. But he by no means neglected preparation for his profes- 
sion to thé extreme degree which he pretended. He had an admirable 
head for the law, with a quick perception and a retentive memory; so 
that he made greater progress than some plodders who were at work all 
day long and a great part of every night. He attended the remarkable 
trials and arguments which came on in Westminster Hall, and picked 
up a good deal of legal knowledge, while he seemed only to be abusing 
the counsel and laughing at the Judges. He would still shut himself up 
for whole mornings, barring his outer door,—when he not only would 
seize upon a classic, and get up the literature of the day, but make a 
serious attack on Littleton and Plowden. He did go almost every even- 
ing to Nando’s coffee-house, near Temple Bar, and swaggered and 
talked loud there about politics and scandal, new plays and favourite 
actresses ; but if he had not taken too much of the punch which Mrs, 
Humphries, the landlady, was celebrated for compounding, and her fair 
daughter served, —on returning to his chambers he would read dili- 
gently, before going to rest, till his candles turned dim in the morning 
light. His contemporary, Craddock, who was admitted to his entire in- 
timacy, and from whom he concealed nothing, writes, “ [t was generally 
supposed that Thurlow in early life was idle; but [ always found him 
close at study in a morning, when I have called at the Temple; and he 
frequently went no farther in an evening than to Nando’s, and then 
only in his déshabille.”* It is quite clear, from his successful combats 
with the members of the “ Literary Club,” and with the first lawyers in 
Westminster Hall, that he had effectually, though irregularly, devoted 
himself to literature and law. Let me, then, anxiously caution the stu- 
dent against being misled by the delusive hope which the supposed idle- 
ness of Thurlow has engendered, that a man may become a great law- 
yer, and rise with credit to the highest offices, without application. 
Thurlow never would have been Chancellor, if he had not studied his 
profession, and he would have been a much greater Chancellor, and 
would have left a much higher name to posterity, if he had studied it 
more steadily, 

The benchers of his Society, who were supposed to direct his studies, 


* Craddock’s Memoirs, vol. i. 79. I presume the déshabille meant that he entered 
the coffee-house without wearing a cut velvet suit and a sword, as lawyers still did 
when they went into fine company. Having reached extreme old age, he told his 
youngest nephew (from whom I received the statement) that ‘ when young he read 
much at night; and that once, while at College, having been unable to complete a 
particular line in a Latin poem he was composing, it rested so on his mind that he 
dreamed of it, completed it in his sleep, wrote it out next morning, and received 
many compliments on its classical and felicitous turn.” 


376 LIFE OF 


and to examine into his proficiency, having ascertained 
[a. D. 1754.] Fe . . 
at he had kept twelve terms by eating the requisite 
number of dinners in the Hall each term, —on the 22d of November, 
1754, called him to the bar, vouching his sufficiency to advocate the 
causes of his fellow-citizens in all courts, civil and criminal. He took 
his seat in the back rows of the Court of King’s Bench, of which Sir 
Dudley Ryder was then Chief Justice, and he went the Western Cir- 
cuit, of which Henley and Pratt were the leaders. But for several years 
he met with little success either in town or country. He had no family 
interest or connexion to assist him; his reputation for idleness: repelled 
business from his chambers, and he was too proud to hug the attorneys 
or to try to get forward by unworthy means. 
When he had been a few years at the bar he fell into pecuniary 
straits. His father had expected that fees would immediately flow in 
upon him, and proposed to withdraw, instead of increasing the very 
moderate allowance which was his sole support. It is even said that 
the future Chancellor, although he practised a laudable economy, was 
actually reduced to the following stratagem to procure a horse to carry 
him round the circuit. He went to a horse-dealer, and said to him that 
he wished to purchase a good roadster—price being no object to him— 
but that he must have a fair trial of the animal’s paces before he con- 
cluded the bargain. The trial being conceded, he rode off to Winches- 
ter, and having been well carried all the way round, but still without 
any professional luck, he returned the horse to his owner, saying that 
‘“‘the animal, notwithstanding some good points, did not altogether suit 
him.” 
At last, fortune smiled upon him. By some chance he had a brief 
[a. p. 1758] in the case of Luke Robinson v. The Earl of Winchel- 

re ‘1 sea, tried before Lord Mansfield, at Guildhall. The leader 
on the opposite side was Sir Fletcher Norton, then the tyrant of the bar, 
who began by treating the unknown junior with his usual arrogance. 
This Thurlow resented with great spirit. ‘They got into an altercation, 
in which Thurlow had with him the sympathies of the bar and the by- 
standers, and with a happy mixture of argument and sarcasm he com- 
pletely put down his antagonist, The attorneys who had smarted much 
under Norton’s despotic rule were exceedingly delighted, and resolved 
to patronise the man who had shown so much courage and capacity.* 

Briefs in cases of a peculiar character did come in, and he was now 
known and talked of in the profession as one supposed to be possessed 


* I was myself present when, under very similar circumstances, Topping at once 
pushed himself into great business at Guildhall, by putting down Gibbs, then At- 
torney-General—quoting the indignant description by Cassius of the tyranny of 
Cesar,— 


“ Why, man, he doth bestride the narrow world 
Like a Colossus; and we petty men 
Walk under his huge legs and peep about 
To find ourselves dishonourable graves, 
The fault—is not in our stars, 
But in ourselves, that we are underlings.” 


LORD CHANCELLOR THURLOW. S17 


of great resources, and likely one day to make a figure, but still he had 
few constant clients, and little reguiar business. He had not credit for 
possessing much technical knowledge of the law, and he did not always 
exhibit that subordination which the leader expects in a junior counsel, 
and which indeed the interest of the client demands. In short, he dis- 
dained to ‘‘ play second fiddle” to those whom he conceived inferior per- 
formers. ‘There was no chance of his getting forward in the routine 
progress of professional advancement, and his friends were still under 
much apprehension of his ultimate failure. 

It has often been said that he made his fortune by his great speech 
at the bar of the House of Lords in the Douglas cause, But this story 
is utterly demolished by the slightest attention to dates. The hearing of 
that celebrated appeal, in which he certainly gave the finest display of 
his forensic powers, did not come on till January, 1769 ; and before then 
he had long had a silk gown, he led his circuit, he was engaged in every 
important case which came on in Westminster Hall, and he had been 
returned to the House of Commons as member for Tamworth. How- 
ever, his retainer as one of the counsel for the appellant in the Douglas 
cause truly had a very material and very favourable influence upon his 
destiny. The occurrence is said to have happened by the purest acci- 
dent. According to legal tradition, soon after the deci- [4. D. 1759.] 
sion of the Court of Session in Scotland that the alleged '"" “* ~*~" 
son of Lady Jane Douglas was a supposititious child purchased at Paris, 
the question, which excited great interest all over Europe, was discussed 
one evening at Nando’s coffee-house—from its excellent punch, and the 
ministrations of a younger daughter of the landlady — still Thurlow’s 
favourite haunt. At this time, and indeed when I myself first began the 
study of the law, the modern club system was unknown; (and as in 
the time of Swift and Addison) men went in the evenings for society to 
coflee-houses, in which they expected to encounter a particular set of 
acquaintance, but which were open to all who chose to enter and offer 
to join in the conversation, at the risk of meeting with cold looks and 
mortifying rebuffs. Thurlow, like his contemporary Dr. Johnson, took 
great pains in gladiatorial discussion, knowing that he excelled.in it, and 
he was pleased and excited when he found a large body of good listen- 
ers. On the evening in question, a friend of his at the English bar 
strongly applauded the judgment against the supposed heir of the house 
of Douglas. For this reason, probably, Thurlow took the contrary 
side. Like most other lawyers he had read the evidence attentively, 
and in a succinct but masterly statement he gave an abstract of it to 
prove that the claimant was indeed the genuine issue of Lady Jane and 
her husband, —dexterously repelling the objections to the claim, and 
contending that there were admitted facts which were inconsistent with 
the theory of the child being the son of the French rope-dancer. Hav- 
ing finished his argument and his punch, he withdrew to his chambers, 
pleased with the victory which he had obtained over his antagonist, who 
was no match for him in dialectics, and who had ventured to express 
an opinion upon the question without having sufficiently studied it. 


378 REIGN OF GEORGE III 


Thurlow, after reading a little brief for a motion in the King’s Bench, 
which his clerk had received in his absence, went to bed, thinking no 
more of the Douglas cause, and ready, according to the vicissitudes of 
talk, to support the spuriousness of the claimant with equal zeal. But 
it so happened that two Scotch law agents, who had come up from Edin- 

[A. p. 1760.] burgh to enter the appeal, having heard of the fame of 

ety ‘4 Nando’s, and having been told that some of the great 
leaders of the English bar were to be seen there, had at a side-table 
been quiet listeners of the disputation, and were amazingly struck with 
the knowledge of the case and the acuteness which Thurlow had exhi- 
bited. ‘The moment he was gone, they went to the landlady and in- 
quired who he was? They had never heard his name before ; but find- 
ing that he was a barrister, they resolved to retain him as junior to pre- 
pare the appellant’s case, and to prompt those who were to lead it at the 
bar of the House of Lords. <A difficulty had occurred about the prepa- 
ration of the case, for there was a wise determination that, from the 
magnitude of the stake, the nature of the question, and \the considera- 
tion that it was to be decided by English law Lords, the plaadoyer 
should be drawn by English counsel, and the heads of the bar who were 
retained — from their numerous avocations — had refused to submit to 
this preliminary drudgery. 

Next morning a retainer, in ‘* Douglas v. The Duke of Hamilton,” 
was left at Thurlow’s chambers, with an immense pile of papers, having 
a fee indorsed upon them, ten times as large as he had ever before re- 
ceived, Ata conference with the agents (who took no notice of Nando’s), 
an explanation was given of what was expected of him,—the Scotch- 
men hinting:that his fame had reached the “ Parliament House at Edin- 
burgh.” He readily undertook the task, and did it the most ample 
justice, showing that he could command, upon occasion, not only striking 
elocution, but patient industry. He repeatedly perused and weighed 
every deposition, every document, and every pleading that had ever 
been brought forward during the suit, and he drew a most masterly case, 
which mainly led to the success of the appeal, and which I earnestly 
recommend to the law student as a model of lucid arrangement and 
forcible reasoning. 

While so employed he made acquaintance with several of the rela- 
tions and connexions of the Douglas family, who took the deepest in- 
terest in the result; and, amongst others, with the Old Duchess of 
Queensberry, the well-known friend of Gay, Pope, Swift, and the other 
wits of the reign of Queen Anne. When she had got over the blunt- 
ness of his manners (which were certainly not those of the viedlle cour), 
she was mightily taken with him, and declared that since the banish- 

ment of Atterbury and the death of Bolingbroke, she had 
[a.p.1761.] : oe 

met with no Englishman whose conversation was so 
charming. She added that, being a genuine Tory, she had considerable 
influence with Lord Bute, the new favourite, and even with the young 
Sovereign himself, who had a just respect for hereditary right, lament- 
ing the fate of the family whom his own had somewhat | irregularly 


LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 879 


supplanted. On this hint Thurlow spoke, and, with the boldness that 
belonged to his character, said that “a silk gown would be very accept- 
able to him.’’? Her Grace was as much surprised as if he had expressed 
a wish to wear a silk petticoat—but upon an explanation, that the 
wished-for favour was the appointment to the dignity of King’s Counsel, 
in the gift of the Government, she promised that it should be conferred 
upon him. 

She was as good as her word. Lord Bute made no sort of difficulty 
when told that the number of King’s Counsel might be indefinitely in- 
creased, bringing only a charge of £40 a year on the public, with an 
allowance of stationery.T 

Lord Northington, in whose department strictly the job was, boggled 
a little, for he knew nothing of Thurlow, except remembering him a 
noisy briefless junior on the Western circuit, and upon inquiry he found 
that neither from his standing, nor his business, had he any fair preten- 
sion to be called within the bar; but the Duchess of Queensberry con- 
trived that George III., although he then had never seen the man to 
whom he was afterwards so much attached, should intimate to the Chan- 
cellor that this young lawyer’s promotion would be personally agreeable 
to his Majesty himself, and all the Chancellor’s objections instantly 
vanished. In December, 1761, Thurlow boldly doffed his stuffed gown 
for the silk, renouncing his privilege to draw law papers, or to appear 
as junior counsel for any plaintiff. 

In the following term he was elected a Bencher of the Inner Temple, 
but it was some time doubtful whether he would reap any [Jan. 1762 
other fruits from his new rank, Rival barristers com- ~~" ‘J 
plained much, that in the seventh year from his call, being known 
for nothing except his impertinence to Sir Fletcher [a.v. 1762.] 
Norton, he should be put over the heads of somg who might ‘"** ; 
have been his father, while the general consolation was, ‘that the silk 
gown could never answer to him, and that he had cut his own throat.” 
He himself had no misgivings, and there were a few of more discern- 
ment, who then predicted that he would eventually rise to the highest 
office in his profession. 

In truth, his success was certain. With the respectable share he 
possessed of real talents and of valuable acquirements, together with 
his physical advantages of dark complexion, strongly marked features, 
piercing eyes, bushy eyebrows, and sonorous voice, all worked to the 
best effect by an immeasurable share of se/f-confidence,—he could not 
fail. This last quality was the chief cause of his greatness. 

Of him, Lady Mary Wortley Montague seems to have been speaking 
prophetically, if, according to her evident meaning, you substitute 
*« self-confidence,” for ‘* impudence,”—which properly belongs only to 


* With this went a certain number of bags to carry briefs ; and when I entered 
the profession no man at the bar could carry a bag who had not received one from 
a King’s counsel. All these perquisites were swept away by the Reform Ministry 

of 1830. 

_ t See vol. v. p. 254, of Southey’s edition of Cowper’s Works. 


380 REIGN OF GEORGE IIL 


a shameless impostor. * A moderate merit,” writes she, * with a large 
share of zmpudence, is more probable to be advanced than the greatest 
qualifications without it. The first necessary qualification is cmpu- 
dence, and (as Demosthenes said of action in oratory) the second is a- 
pudence, and the third still ¢pudence. No modest man ever did, or 
ever will, make his fortune. Your friends, Lord Halifax, Robert Wal- 
pole, and all other remarkable instances of quick advancement, have been 
remarkably zmpudent. The ministry is like a play at court; there’s 
a little door to get in, and a great crowd without—shoving and thrusting 
who shall be foremost; people who knock others with their elbows, 
disregard a little kick on the shins, and still thrust heartily forwards, 
are sure of a good place. Your modest man stands behind in the 
crowd, is shoved about by every body, his clothes torn, almost squeezed 
to death—and sees a thousand get in before him, that don’t make so 
good a figure as himself.” 

When Thurlow appeared in court with his silk robe and full bottom 
wig—lowering frowns and contemptuous smiles successively passing 
across his visage as the arguments or the judgment proceeded—the so- 

ys licitors could not behold him without some secret awe, 
[a. p. 1763.] rae es : A 
and without believing that he was possessed of some 
mysterious powers which he could bring into activity in their service. 
When he had an opportunity of opening his mouth, he spoke in a sort 
of oracular or judicial tone, as if he had an undoubted right to pro- 
nounce the verdict or judgment in favour of his client. He appeared 
to think that his opponent was guilty of great presumption in contro- 
verting any of his positions, and unless his cause was desperately bad 
(when he would spontaneously give it up) he tried to convey the notion 
that the Judges, if they showed any disposition to decide against him, 
were chargeable with gross ignorance, or were actuated by some cor- 
rupt motive. By such arts he was soon in first-rate business, and all of 
a sudden—from extreme poverty—in the receipt of a very large income. 
I do not find that he was counsel in any celebrated cases before he was 
Solicitor-General ; but Burrow, and the other contemporary reporters, 
show that during the eight following years, he argued many of the 
most important questions of law which came on for decision in West- 
minster Hall. 

Hitherto he had taken little part in politics, and he seemed in a state 
of great indifference between the two parties, associating with the mem- 
bers. of both indiscriminately—in conversation, sometimes speaking for, 
and sometimes against the taxing of the colonies, and sometimes cen- 
suring, and sometimes defending the prosecution of Wilkes. Now be- 
ginning to feel the stings of ambition, and resolved upon political ad- 
vancement, it was necessary to choose a side. During Lord Chatham’s 
second ministry, the Whigs had gone down in the world most lamen- 
tably, and they seemed to have lost for ever their illustrious chief. 
Toryism was decidedly favoured at Court, and had the ascendency in 
both Houses of Parliament. Thurlow declared himself a Tory, and on 
the interest of the party he had joined—in the new Parliament which 


LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 381 


met in May, 1768, he was returned for Tamworth, since illustrated by 
a still more distinguished representative. To this party he most zea- 
lously and unscrupulously adhered till he was deprived of the Great 
Seal by the younger Pitt; but Iam afraid that, in his heart, he cared 
little about Tory principles, and that he professed and acted upon them 
so long—only to please the King and to aggrandize himself, 

It might have been expected, from his impetuous and sanguine tem- 
per, that he would have been eager to gain Parliamentary distinction 
as soon as he had taken his seat; but he had not yet selected his leader 
in the different sections into which the Tories were then subdivided, and 
he was cautious not to ae himself till it should be seen who gained 
the ascendency. 

Meanwhile the Douglas asian after eight years’ preparation, came 
on to be heard at the bar of the Flouse of Lords, [a. p. 1769 
and attracted a greater share of public attention than ** * ‘] 
any political debate in either House. Thurlow led for the appellant, 
and, having for years devoted himself to the case—by his admirable 
pleading he showed what excellence he might have reached, and what 
solid fame he might have acquired, if his industry had been equal to his 
talent. 

This was a very brilliant passage of his life, for he was not only 
rapturously applauded as an advocate, but he gained immense éclat for 
his courage and gentleman-like deportment in an affair of honour to 
which the cause gave rise. As counsel for Mr. Douglas, the appellant, 
he felt it his duty to animadvert with great severity on the conduct of 
Mr. Andrew Stewart, a gentleman of education, and well esteemed in 
the world, who had been concerned as an agent in getting up the evi- 
dence and conducting the suit for the Duke of Hamilton, As soon as 
Thurlow had finished his first day’s argument, Stewart sent him a chal- 
lenge, requiring a hostile meeting next morning. Thurlow wrote back 
for answer, ‘ that the desired meeting Mr. Stewart should have, but not 
till the hearing of the appeal was concluded.” J believe he had said 
nothing against the challenger but what was justified by his instructions 
and the circumstances of the case—so that, according to professional 
etiquette, he might have applied for protection to the House of Lords, 
who would have treated the challenge-as a contempt of their authority 
and a breach of privilege. When the hearing was over, the meeting 
actually did take place in Kensington Gardens, and shots were ex- 
changed—happily without effect. Mr. Stewart afterwards declared 
“that Mr. Thurlow advanced and stood up to him like an elephant.”* 

I do not find that the honourable and learned member for Tamworth 
spoke in the House till the tremendous crisis in Janu- 

“a 1770, upon the re-appearance of Lord Chatham Lean edd hte] 
in full vigour, the dismissal of Lord Camden, the melancholy fate of 


* IT have in vain searched the “ Annual Register’? and contemporary magazines 
and newspapers for farther particulars of this duel. A gentleman still alive, who 
remembers it well, says that “Thurlow, on his way to the field of battle, stopped to 
eat an enormous breakfast at a tavern near Hyde Park Corner.” 


382 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


Charles Yorke, and the formation of a new government to persecute 
Wilkes and to tax the colonies. In the debate on the resolution moved 
by Mr. Dowdeswell, arising out of Lutterell being seated for Middlesex 
because Wilkes was alleged to be disqualified by his expulsion, * that 
by the law of the Jand, and the law and usage of Parliament, no person 
eligible of common right can be incapacitated by a resolution of the 
House, but by an act of Parliament only,” Mr. Wedderburn supported 
it against Lord North, saying, “the noble Lord asks ‘ will the House 
of Commons censure and disgrace itself?’ let me ask in my turn, will 
the House of Commons compose the minds of the people? Will they 
recover the good opinion and confidence of those whom some gentlemen 
have been pleased to call the rabble, the base-born, the scum of the 
earth ?”—Then covered with maiden blushes, thus spoke the honour- 
able and learned member for Tamworth: “Sir, as the argument now 
seems to be carried on by questions, I shall ask in my turn, how came 
the House of Commons to determine who should sit among them for- 
merly if they cannot determine who shall sit among them now? How 
came they to determine that the Attorney-General, the Solicitor-Gene- 
ral, and the Masters in Chancery, could not sit here, because they might 
possibly be called upon to attend the House of Lords? and how came 
this determination to be acquiesced in till those persons were re-admitted 
by a subsequent vote ?”’* 

This is a very fair specimen of Thurlow’s manner; for he never 
hesitated to resort to reasoning which he must have known to be so- 
phistical, or to make a convenient assertion,—trusting largely to the 
ignorance of his audience. ‘There was no analogy between determining 
whether by the usage of Parliament a particular office was a disqualifi- 
cation to sit in the House of Commons, and enacting a new disqualifica- 
tion by a vote. Moreover, in point of fact, there never had been any 
votes, such as he supposed, for or against the general right of the 
Attorney and Solicitor-General andthe Masters in Chancery to sit in 
the House. But he spoke in such a loud voice, and with such an air 
of authority, that no one ventured to contradict him, and he was con- 
sidered a great acquisition by the Government. 

The office of Solicitor-General immediately after became vacant by 

[Marcu 28, 1770.] the Seager of Dunning, and Thurlow was 
joyously appointed to it.t 


* 16 Parl. Hist. 804, A few days before the House had heard the maiden speech 
of a very different man, the Honourable C. J. Fox.—16 Parl. Hist. 726. This was 
a very memorable Session in our party history. During the course of it came out 
Dr. Johnson’s “ False Alarm,” and Edmund Burke’s “ Causes of the present Dis- 
contents,” in the worst and best styles of the respective authors. 

t In a Life of Sir W. Blackstone prefixed to his “* Reports,” it is said that he upon 
this occasion declined the office of Solicitor-General (vol. i. xvii.): but the offer was 
very faint—merely in compliance with an expectation which had been held out to 
him when he entered Parliament, and it was accompanied with a promise of the 
first puisne judgeship which should become vacant. The “ Doctor,” as he was then 
called, was infinitely superior as a jurist to Thurlow, and was covered with literary 
glory by the recent publication of his ‘* Commentrarres,” which rescued our profes- 
sion from the imputation of barbarism ; and while it contained a systematic Digest 


LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 383 


CHAPTER CLVI. 


CONTINUATION OF THE LIFE OF LORD THURLOW TILL HE WAS MADE 
LORD CHANCELLOR, 


Tue new Solicitor-General escaped knighthood, now considered a 
disgrace.* He was immediately obliged to present himself before his 
constituents at Tamworth, but he was re-elected without opposition, and 
he continued to represent this place till he was transferred to the Upper 
House. 

He did not, by any means, disappoint expectation as a parliamentary 
partisan. While a representative of the people, he ever readily and 
zealously followed the instructions of the Government, as if he had been 
arguing in a court of law from his brief. He often displayed, in the 
debate, vigorous reasoning and manly eloquence,—and, when beaten, 
he could always cover his retreat with a broad assertion, a cutting sar- 
casm, or a threatening look. 

The first occasion on which he distinguished himself, after becoming 
a law officer of the Crown, was in the debate on the motion for leave to 
bring in a bill to take away the power of filing Ez-Officio Informations. 
This was opposed, in a very able and temperate speech, by Sir William 
De Grey, the Attorney-General, who showed, by clear authorities, that 
the power by law belonged to his office, and argued, that there could be 
nothing unconstitutional in his being allowed, upon his responsibility, to 
bring a man to trial for sedition before a jury, who would decide upon 


of English law, was justly praised by Charles Fox for its style as a specimen of 
genuine Anglicism. But the Doctor being returned for Westbury at the same time 
as Thurlow for Tamworth, entirely failed in the House of Commons. Being called 
forth to defend the Government on the Middlesex election, he wrecked his reputa- 
tion as a constitutional lawyer; and George Grenville, reading the book, proved that 
he had contended for a different doctrine in debate from that which he had laid 
down in his Commentaries. Having published a pamphlet in his own defence, he 
got into a controversy with Junius, in which he was signally worsted ;' and his re- 
treat from political life was now earnestly desired both by himself and by his patrons. 
Thurlow was their man! 

The Duke of Grafton’s MS. Journal, after stating that Lord North behaved ill to 
his Solicitor-General, thus proceeds :—* Mr. Dunning was too high-minded to sub- 
mit to any indignity. ‘Not long after he resigned his office, und was succeeded by 
Thurlow, a bold and able lawyer, and a speaker of the first rate, as well in Parlia- 
ment as at the bar. His principles leaned to high prerogative, and I fear his coun- 
sels brought no advantage to the King or the nation.” 

* George III., to keep up the respectability of the order, soon after insisted on 
the law officers of the Crown, as well as the Judges, submitting to it; and the same 


rule has since been observed, unless in the case of the sons of peers, who are “ ho- 
nourable” by birth. 


‘See Junius to Sir W. Blackstone, 29th July, 1769, and the four following 


letters, 


384 REIGN OF GEORGE IIL 


the truth of the charge. Serjeant Glynn and others followed on the 
opposite side, contending that the power was liable to abuse; that it 
had been abused ; and that a jury was no protection, on account of the 
fashionable doctrine now acted upon by Lord Mansfield and other Judges, 
that “the jury had nothing to do with the question of libel or no libel ; 
the criminality or innocence of the writing charged to be libellous being 
a pure question ef law for the determination of the Court.”—Thus 
answered Mr. Solicitor, in that rude, bantering, turbulent, impressive 
style of oratory which characterized all his Parliamentary harangues, 
and which gained him such a reputation with his contemporaries: ‘ Sir, 
however much a representative may be bound to express the voice of 
his constituents, I cannot greatly approve of that patriotism which prompts 
any member to adopt every popular rumour, and to assert the rumour as 
a fact,on his own authority. We ought to make a discreet selection, to 
distinguish between truth and falsehood, and not to swallow every vul- 
gar prejudice. ‘Therefore, I cannot applaud those oblique reflections 
which, in imitation of pamphleteers and newsmongers, some honourable 
members seem so fond of casting on this House, Such strokes may 
serve as stilts to raise the authors up to the notice of the mob, but will 
not, I am persuaded, add to their character in this assembly. The arti- 
fice is too gross to deceive. ‘There is no lawyer, nor any other sensible 
person, within these walls who will not allow all the prosecutions lately 
carried on by the Attorney-General were extremely proper, if not neces- 
sary. Why, then, should we, when no real danger, no late encroach- 
ment, presses, sally forth, like a band of Quixotes, to attack this windmill 
of a giant, this imaginary magician, who keeps none of our rights, none 
of our privileges, under the power of his enchantments? Nota single 
wight, not a single damsel, has he injured. All who pretend to dread 
him walk at large, ay, more at large, I suspect, than they ought. Our 
booksellers and printers have no reason to complain of being held in 
trammels.. They are allowed every reasonable indulgence, ‘and they 
carry it to its utmost limits. Shall we give licentiousness an ample 
range? For my own part, I cannot help considering the project as a 
crazy conceit, solely intended for gaining a little popularity ; for men, 
however helpless, will ‘spread the thin oar and catch the driving gale,’ 
—the popular breeze, whose murmur is so soothing to certain ears. But 
the wisdom and gravity of this House must perceive that the power at 
present lodged in the Attorney-General is necessary, as well for speedily 
punishing as preventing daring libels. If no other process is left but the 
common one of bringing the affair before a grand jury, the delinquent 
may in the meanwhile escape. No offender can be brought to justice. 
What is the consequence? ‘The licentiousness Of the press will increase. 
Crimes will multiply. Nothing will be published but libels and lampoons. 
The press will teem with scurrility and falsehood. ‘The minds of the 
people will be misled and perverted by scandalous misrepresentations. 
The many-headed beast will swallow the poison, and the land will con- 
sequently be one scene of anarchy and confusion.” He next applied 
himself to a recent conviction of a bookseller for the unauthorized act of a 


LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 385 


servant, and according to the report (which is scarcely credible) he 
worked himself up to say,—‘‘ In civil cases, the master is confessedly 
answerable for the faults of his servants, How comes he in criminal 
cases not to be subject to the same rule? The culprit was justly con- 
demned, and will be justly punished.”* He then comes to handle the 
rights of juries in cases of libel (be it remembered) after they liad been 
solemnly vindicated by Lord Camden, who had recently resigned the 
office of Chancellor, having held it for several years with general ap- 
plause :—‘ Sir, the other charge is equally groundless and absurd. The 
construction of libels belongs by law and precedent to the Judge and 
not to the jury, because it is a point of law which they are not compe- 
tent to decide. If any other rule prevailed,—if the matter were left to 
the jury,—there would be nothing fixed and permanent in the law. It 
would not only vary in different counties and cities, according to their 
different interests and passions, but also in the minds of the same indi- 
viduals, as they should happen at different times to be agitated by dif- 
ferent humours and caprices. God forbid that the laws of England 
should ever be reduced to this uncertainty! All our dictionaries of de- 
cisions, all our reports, and Coke upon Littleton itself, would then be 
useless. Our young students, instead of coming to learn the law in the 
Temple and in Westminster Hall, would be obliged to seek it in the 
wisdom of petty juries, country assizes, and untutored mechanics. Adieu 
to precision, adieu to consistency, adieu to decorum! All would be per- 
plexity, contradiction, and confusion. The law would be like Joseph’s 
coat, become nothing but a ridiculous patchwork of many shreds and 
many colours,—a mere sick man’s dream, without coherence, without 
meaning,—a wild chaos of jarring and heterogeneous principles, which 
would deviate farther and farther from harmony. Yet the prevention 
of this state is the crime with which our Judges are charged! O tem- 
pora! O mores! to what are we at last come?” 

It does seem astounding to us that such a speech should be delivered, 
and tolerated, and applauded by the ministers of the Crown after the 
Revolution, and in the latter end of the eighteenth century. It ought 
to be recorded as showing the progress of public opinion and the im- 
provements of the constitution in recent times. The matter in dispute 
—the Attorney-General’s power to file criminal informations for libel, 
is very immaterial. He might safely be permitted, in all cases as: public 
prosecutor, to put parties accused on their trial, and the institution of 
grand juries will be preserved in this country for its collateral ber efits 
rather than as a safeguard to innocence against unjust accusation. There 
is no longer any disposition in Attorney-Generals to persecute the press, 
and if there were, no difficulty is ever experienced in inducing grand 
juries to find bills of indictment in any cases, however frivolous. Look- 
ing to the manner in which indictments for perjury and for conspiracy 


* This case is expressly provided for by a bill I had the honour to introduce into 
Parliament, commonly called “ Lord Campbell’s Libel Act,” 6 & 7 Vic. c. 96, s. 7, 
saving the master from criminal responsibility for the unauthorized act of the 


. servant. +16 Parl. Hist. 1144, 


VOL. V. 25 


386 REIGN OF GEORGE IIf. 


are used as instruments of revenge, vexation, and extortion, it would be 
a greater improvement upon our. juridical institutions to enact that no 
such indictments shall be preferred without the sanction of a responsi- 
ble public officer, than that the power of filing criminal informations 
should be entirely abolished.* But the observations by which Thurlow 
defended it were most insulting to public liberty, and if now offered by 
a law officer of the crown under what is called a Tory or Conservative 
government, would insure his being disclaimed by his leader overnight, 
and dismissed from his office next morning. 
But Mr. Solicitor Thurlow was so much applauded and encouraged 
[Dec. 6, 1770.] that on Serjeant Glynn’s motion soon after for an 
inquiry into the administration of criminal justice, he 
considerably exceeded his former doings; for he not only proposed a 
severe censure upon the mover, but plainly intimated an opinion that 
trial by jury should be abolished in all cases of libel, and that the liberty 
of the press should be in the exclusive guardianship of a Judge ap- 
pointed by the Crown. If,” said he, ‘* we allow every pitiful patriot 
thus to insult us with ridiculous accusations without making him to pay 
forfeit for his temerity, we shall be eternally pestered with the humming 
and buzzing of these stingless wasps. ‘Though they cannot wound or 
poison, they will tease and vex. They will divert our attention from 
the important affairs of state to their own mean antipathies, and passions, 
and prejudices. I hope we shall now handle them so roughly as to make 
this the last of such audacious attempts. They are already ridiculous 
and contemptible. To crown their disgrace, let us inflict upon them 
some exemplary punishment. In deciding the question of libel, so 
many circumstances are at once to be kept in view, so many ponderous 
interests are to be weighed, so many comparisons to be made, and so 
many judgments formed, that the mind of an ordinary man is distracted, 
and confounded, and rendered incapable of coming to any satisfactory 
conclusion. None but a judge who has from his infancy been accus- 
tomed to determine intricate cases, is equal to such a difficult task. Jf 
we even suppose the jury sufficiently enlightened to unravel those knotty 
points, yet there remains an insuperable objection. In state libels their 
passions are frequently so much engaged, that they may be justly con- 
sidered as parties concerned against the Crown. No justice can there- 
Jore be expected from them in these cases. 'n order to preserve the 
balance of our constitution, let us leave to the Judge, as the most in- 
different person, the right of determining the malice or innocence of 
the intention of the libeller. Much dust has been raised about civil and 
criminal actions ; but to what purpose? Js not reparation to be made 


* During my seven years’ Attorney-Generalship I filed only one criminal infor 
mation—against Fergus O’Connor for libels in the “ Northern Star,” inciting the 
people to insurrection and plunder. There could not have been the smallest diffi- 
culty in having had an indictment found by the Grand Jury of the county of York; 
but I wished to take upon myself the whole responsibility of the prosecution. Cob- 
bett (I think with some justice) complained that the Attorney General, instead of 
boldly prosecuting him by his own authority, had recourse to the subterfuge of an 
indictment,—and by this, among other topics, got an acquittal. 





LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 387 
to the public for any injury sustained by the public as much as to an 
individual? Is the welfare of the nation in general of less consequence 
than that of a single person? Where then is the propriety of making 
such a bustle about the malice or innocence of the intention? The in- 
jury done is the only proper measure of the punishment to be inflicted, 
as well as of the damage to be assessed.””* 

This tirade against trial by jury, and confounding of civil injuries to 
individuals with crimes against the state, proved so ° 
agreeable to the higher power, that at the end of a EES CA 
month Thurlow was promoted to the office of Attorney-General, in the 
room of De Grey, laid asleep on “ the cushion of the Common Pleas,” 
and the Government was thereby supposed to be greatly strengthened. 

When he made these speeches he was exceedingly exasperated 
against juries, by reason of the verdict in the case of Rez v. Miller. 
This was a criminal information for printing and publishing Junius’s 
celebrated letter to the King. It was contrived that the Solicitor- 
General, by reason of his supposed superior vigour, should conduct the 
trial on the part of the Crown. Notwithstanding his doctrine, that the 
jury had nothing to do with the question whether the letter was a libel 
or not, he was at great pains in addressing them to impress them with 
an opinion of its criminality, More suo he thus discoursed of the 
liberty of the press :—‘* Undoubtedly the man who has indulged the 
liberty of robbing upon the highway, has a very considerable portion 
of it allotted to him. But where is the liberty of the man who is robbed ? 
When the law is silent, reputation is invaded, tyranny is established, 
and an opportunity is given to venal writers to vent their matice for 
money against the best characters in the country. Do not, under pre- 
tence of protecting the liberty of those who do wrong, encourage them 
in the destruction of all laws human and divine.” He then goes over 
the whole letter, sentence by sentence, denouncing its atrocity, and ex- 
claiming, “‘ For God’s sake is that no libel?” Yet he concludes by tell- 
ing them, very peremptorily, that they have only to consider whether 
the defendant printed and published the letter, and by cautioning them 
not to imitate the conduct of the infamous author who had become the 
accuser of his King, and attacking all mankind, had not the courage to 
show his face, or to tell his name. The clearest evidence was given 
that the defendant had printed and published the letter ; but after a reply 
from Mr, Solicitor, more furious than his opening, the jury thought fit 
to find a verdict of Nor Guirrry—to the unspeakable delight of the 
assembled crowds, who rent the air with their acclamations.t-— What 
added to his mortification was, that another prosecution against Wood- 
fall for printing and publishing the same letter was conducted by Sir 


_ William De Grey, the Attorney-General himself, who, displaying much 
- more moderation and mildness, prevailed upon the jury to find a verdict 


of * Guilty of printing and publishing,”—although they added the word 
“ only,” on which account a new trial was granted. 


* 16 Parl. Hist. 1290. t 20 St. Tr. 870-896. t Ib. 895-922. 


388 REIGN OF GEORGE IIL 


Thurlow’s first appearance in the House of Commons as Attorney- 
: General, was on the memorable occasion when 
Bo Ae Crosby the Lord Mayor, and Oliver an Alderman 
of London, were brought to the bar,—having discharged a printer, 
arrested by order of the House for publishing debates,—and having 
committed to custody the officer of the House who executed the war- 
rant. Alderman Oliver, instead of making any apology, said “he 
owned and gloried in the fact laid to his charge; he knew that what- 
ever punishment was intended, nothing he could say would avert it; as 
for himself he was perfectly unconcerned ; and as he expected little 
from their justice he defied their power.” A motion being then made 
to send him to the Tower, which was resisted by Sir George Saville and 
Serjeant Glynn, Mr. Attorney Thurlow, resorting to the genus dicendt 
interrogans, of which he was particularly fond, exclaimed, ‘“ Shall it 
be said, sir, that this House is dishonoured in maintaining its confirmed 
privileges? Is not the generosity, is not the pride of the House, alarmed 
by so degrading a competition? Have not the members of this House 
as conscientious a veneration for oaths as the Mayor of London? Or 
are they afraid to punish his licentiousness, when he is not afraid to in- 
sult their authority? All that’s man, all that’s Briton in me, is firing 
in my bosom while I ask these simple questions! Well may our enemies 
say that we have sacrificed the dearest ties that bound us to our con- 
stituents, if we now suffer the whole body of the English Commons to 
be trod upon by the instruments of a despicable faction. Have we so 
long defended our privileges against the tyranny of kings, to fall at last 
before the turbulence of a seditious city-magistrate? Or has the con- 
stitution given us sufficient title to guard against the encroachments 
of the Crown, without means of crushing the ambition of an Al- 
derman ?” 

Mr. Attorney received a very severe chastisement from Dunning, 
who used language consistent with the just preservation of parlia- 
mentary privileges,—and to be for ever had in remembrance as a cau- 
tion against the abuse of it. ‘ The people will naturally inquire how 
we, their representatives, have executed our trust, and will as naturally 
execrate our names, 


‘If once we vilely turn that very power 
Which we derive from popular esteem 
To sap the bulwarks of the public freedom.’ 


Sir, the people have already opposed us by their magistrates, and 
they will oppose us farther by their juries;—though were we, in fact, 
as much respected as we are already despised,—as much esteemed as 
we are universally detested,—the establishment of tyranny in ourselves, 
who are appointed for no purpose but to repel’it in others, would expose 
us to the abhorrence of every good Englishman. Let us, therefore, 
stop where we are; let us not justify oppression by oppression, nor for- 
get our posterity if we are regardless of our country. Let even the 
abject principle of self which actuates, I fear, too many of my auditors, 
for once operate in the cause of virtue.” Alderman Oliver was sent to 


LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 389 


the Tower by a majority of 170 to 38, and Crosby, the Lord Mayor, 
by a majority of 202 to 39 ;* but by this struggle, the right of publish- 
ing Parliamentary debates was substantially established, and it is there- 
fore to be reckoned a remarkable era in our constitutional history. 

In the following session the Minister was much puzzled in meeting 
General Burgoyne’s motion to censure the proceedings [May, 1773.] 
of Lord Clive in the East Indies, by which a new empire ty g 
was added to the Crown of England. The considerate were aware 
that this extraordinary man deserved to have statues erected to him, but 
there was a public clamour against him which the Government was 
afraid to face. It was, therefore, left an open question. ‘* Lord North 
himnself spoke for the inquiry, but faintly and reluctantly,’£ while the 
Solicitor-General was required to oppose it, and the Attorney-General 
to support it. The latter, who had no notion of ever fighting with 
muffled gloves, fell foul of his colleague, and of Indian conquest, and 
Indian peculation. ‘The evils complained of,” said he, “ have been 
slurred over, or ingeniously palliated by my honourable and learned 
friend. How can we better begin the work of Indian reform, which all 
admit to be necessary, than by resolving that the acquisitions here de- 
scribed are illegal? and how unjust, nugatory, and ridiculous would it 
be to come to such a determination without taking a retrospective view, 
and enforcing future regulations by present vigour? I admit that what 
is done in the heat and hurry of conquest, in the moment of revolution, 
is not to be examined too critically by the rules of school philosophy, 
and the morality of the closet. But, sir, these misdeeds are of a very 
different complexion—cool deliberate transactions—treaties—negotia- 
tions—wars or no wars—the event the same in all—one general scene 
of rapine and plunder—nabobs dethroned—nabobs elected—pretended 
conventions with these children of power—these ephemeral sovereigns— 
not for the advantage of the Company, but for the profit of individuals. 
Did John Duke of Marlborough make treaties with foreign powers, stipu- 
lating that himself, Prince Eugene, and the Grand Pensionary should be 
paid so and so? To what purpose produce cases, if they are not cases 
in point? ‘The oppressions of Bengal have been as severe in time of 
peace as in time of war? Can this be right? And if wrong, why not 
inquire into it? And why inquire into it, if, when your inquiry is fin- 
ished, it is to produce nothing? No mode of conduct can be so weak 


* 17 Parl. Hist. 58-163, 

t The right never has been questioned since. There is still a foolish standing 
order of both Houses against publishing debates ; but this is a mere dead letter, and 
the minister who would try to enforce it would be like Canute on his throne forbid- 
ding the flowing of the tide. Indeed, there are very few members who would now 
speak if their speeches were not to be reported; and after a division, proceedings 
are suspended till the reporters’ gallery is re.opened.—The effectual protection of 
the press and of the public would require an enactment that no one should be liable 
to an action or indictment for publishing a fair and bona fide report of the pro- 
ceedings of either House. I introduced a clause to this effect into my Libel Bill; 
but though it was warmly supported by Lord Denman, it was opposed by Lord 
Brougham, and I could not carry it. 

t Gibbon to Mr. Holroyd, 11th May, 1773. Miscell. Works, i. 469. 


390 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


as that which only points out crimes but takes no measures to punish 
them.” Thus ran on for a long time the powerful but turbid stream of 
his eloquence, and notwithstanding a touching address from Lord Clive 
himself,—to the great embarrassment of the Government, the resolu- 
tions were all carried by a large majority.* 

In the beginning of 1774, Thurlow had his first encounter with Horne 

Tooke—in which he was foiled. The parson was 
eb alss se) brought to the bar of the House on a charge of 
being the author of a libellous letter in the ** Morning Advertiser,” ad- 
dressed to Sir Fletcher Norton, the Speaker; but he did not choose to 
plead guilty, and there being no evidence to prove the authorship, Mr. 
Attorney boisterously supported an inquisitorial motion, that certain 
journeymen printers from the Morning Advertiser office should be ex- 
amined to know from whom they received the manuscript. He thus 
concluded, ** With respect to any cruel intention against Mr. Horne, I 
disclaim, for one, so foul an idea. It is well known that in my official 
character, I want no author. The printer of a likel is enough for me, 
and I ever think it injudicious to look beyond the printer. Iam not Mr. 
Horne’s prosecutor, and, personally, [ am not his enemy. Further than 
the cause of justice is concerned, his acquittal or conviction is to me a 
matter of utter indifference. If he be innocent, I shall be glad to see 
him discharged ; but if he be guilty, I should be sorry to see a man 
escape with impunity who has daringly libelled the British Commons 
legally assembled in Parliament.” Although Mr. Burke declared that 
“the motion—begot by folly, and nursed by despotism—was without a 
precedent in the annals of infamy,” it was carried by a large majority :T 
but the printers being called in, professed the most profound ignorance 
on the subject, and this time the parson walked off triumphantly.t 

As the Grenville Act was passing, Thurlow opposed it, and truly 

[Fen. 25, 1774.] foretold that the time would come when the decisions 

of the Committees under it would be deemed as cor- 
rupt as those of the House in a body—the distinction in practice being 
only that the ballot gave a petitioner or sitting member belonging to the 
opposition the chance of having in the committee a majority of his own 
partisans ;} whereas when the whole House sat as judges, he was 
almost sure to be “ cast,” and a decision against the ministerial candi- 
date indicated an approaching change in the administration. 

Soon afterwards Thurlow attacked and threw out the bill for the ex- 
tension of copywright, then confined to the brief period of fourteen 
years. He denounced the booksellers as ‘*a set of impudent monopo- 
lizing men, who had raised a fund of 30004. to file bills in Chancery 
against any person who should endeavour to get a livelihood as well as 
themselves, and pretending to have an exclusive right to publish all 


“17 Parl. Hist. 850-882. t 132 to 44, t 17 Parl. Hist. 1003-1050. 

§ 17 Parl. Hist. 1072. I much fear that Sir R. Peel’s act on this subject will be 
found equally inoperative; for though there is an attempt made by it to exclude 
chance, and deliberately to trim the balance,—unequal weight is always thrown into 
one scale,—and the degree to which the equipoise is destroyed becomes immaterial. 


LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 391 


works from Homer’s Iliad to Hawkesworth’s Voyages—a mere compo- 
sition of trash—for which they had the audacity to demand three 
guineas !* 

But the grand subject of Parliamentary discussion now was the dis- 
pute with America. As may be supposed, Thurlow took a most zealous 
part, and uttered very violent language against the colonists. He scorned 
the very notion of concession or Conciliationss he considered “ sedi- 
tion” and “ treason” (like tobacco and potatoes) the peculiar growth of 
the American soil. ‘The natives of those regions he thought were born 
to be taxed, and when his friend Johnson’s pamphlet, “ Taxation no 
Tyranny,” was published, he lamented that the passage was struck out 
which had been originally introduced as an answer to the objection that 
we had not previously taxed them :—“ We do not put a calf into the 
plough—we wait till he is an ox.”f 

His first explosion was in the debate upon the Coercion Bill for regu- 
lating the government of Massachusetts Bay. Charles M i 
Fox having severely attacked it, saying that there was LM atid, ied 

co) bi ’ ayl 5 

not an American but who must reject or resist the right of taxing them, 
and that the bill was a clear violation of charters, Mr. Attorney answered : 
‘« Sir, this Bill is adopted to give magistracy the requisite authority for 
the execution of the laws; being a measure of precaution, it carries 
with it no severity, unless the pleasure of disobeying is cheaply pur- 
chased by punishment. To say that we have a right to tax America 
and never to exercise that right, is ridiculous ; and: aman must abuse 
his own understanding very much to whom that right can appear doubt- 
ful.. We are told that we should ask them to tax themselves; but to 
procure a tax by requisition is a most ridiculous absurdity, the sove- 
reignty being admitted to remain in this country. Their charter is sub- 
ject to our legislative power; and whoever looks into it will see that no 
privileges were meant to be given them inconsistent with our right to 
legislate for them, and to tax them when we think they ought to be 
taxed, ” Burke took him severely to task for these expressions ; but so 
low was the Whig minority at this time, that, on the division, they could 
only muster 64 to 239. 

In the debate which took place on the address to the Crown shortly 
before hostilities commenced, Dunning having strongly (Fen, 2, 1774 
objected to the term “ Rebels,” applied by Lord North /* *** 5 
to the Americans, Thurlow thundered out a dreadful denunciation 
against them, enumerating their alleged breaches of allegiance, and 
exclaiming, ‘* Now, sir, if this is not rebellion, I desire the honourable 
and learned gentleman to tell us what is rebellion.” He maintained 
that they were “rebels ;” that they ought to be treated as such; and 
that vigorous measures of coercion, before they had marshalled their 
armies, could alone save us from the ruin which would overtake us if 


#17 Parl. Hist. 1086, 1104. 

t Johnson. “They struck it out either critically as too ludicrous, or politically as 
too exasperating.” — Boswell, ii, 327, 

$17 Parl. Hist. 1313. 


392 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


their plan of independence were carried into effect.* This controversy 
was renewed in the debate upon the bill for cutting off the trade of the 
New England colonies, when Dunning contending that the Americans 
were only defending their jnst rights, Thurlow declared ‘ he had deli- 
berately given a written opinion upon papers laid before him, that there 
was a rebellion in Massachusetts’ Bay ;” but, the House being im Com- 
mittee, Sir Fletcher Norton, the Speaker, properly observed that ‘ rebel- 
lion” was not a term known to the law, and that the only legal question 
was, whether there had been a “ levying of war,” amounting to high 
treason ?+ 

Of all the orators on the Government side in the debates which 
[Fer. 10, 1775.] uphered in the fatal strife, the language of Thurlow 

was always the most violent and exasperating, and he 
seems to have been actuated by the belief that it was desirable to goad 
the colonists into open resistance, as they might then be effectually 
crushed, It is amusing to find him declaring that he did not speak, on 
such occasions, as a lawyer; “that he always did, and always would, 
leave the lawyer in Westminster Hall, and be in that House only a 
member of Parliament;”’t by which, judging from his practice, he 
seemed to consider that he had the privilege, which has been practised 
by other Attorney-Generals, and by Chancellors too, in debate, to lay 
down for law what best suited his purpose at the moment. Of this he 
soon after gave a practical example, by declaring that there was no il- 
legality in sending Hanoverian troops, without the authority of Parlia- 
ment, to garrison Gibraltar and Minorca, these places being no part of 
“this kingdom,” so that the King might lawfully assemble a large 
army of foreigners in Guernsey, or Jersey, or the Isle of Man; whereas 
it seems quite clear, that by ‘this kingdom,” in the Bill of Rights, 
must be understood ‘ the British dominions,” 

When the American Prohibitory Bill was discussed, he animadverted 
with scorn upon Mr. Burke’s plan of conciliation. He added that, as 
Attorney-General, he had a right, by sczre faczas, to set aside every 
charter in America as forfeited; although he allowed that, in our pre- 
sent situation, such a process would be justly the object of ridicule.|| 

Having introduced a bill to suspend the Habeas Corpus Act, with a 

[Fes. 1777.] view to American traitors, he defended it from the ob- 
: “4 jection, that it might be put in force at home, by ob- 
serving, that ‘treason and rebellion were the native growth of Ame- 


* 18 Parl. Hist. 225. Lord North soon afterwards, at a city dinner, having 
announced the receipt of intelligence of an advantage gained over the “ Rebels,” and 
being taken to task by Charles Fox and Colonel Barré, who were present, for ap- 
plying such language to “our fellow-subjects in America,” exclaimed, with the 
inimitable talent for good-humoured raillery which distinguished him, ‘ Well, 
then, to please you, I will call them the gentlemen in opposition on the other side of 
the water.”—This has been told me as a traditionary anecdote not hitherto in print. 

+ 18 Parl. Hist. 300. t Ib, 609. 

§ 18 Parl. Hist. 772, 776, 1332. He at last seems to have been ashamed of his 


bad law—saying, “it was idle to insist on the legality or illegality of the measure.” 
| 18 Parl, Hist. 999. 


LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 393 


rica.” However, by way of threatening and taunting the members 
of opposition, he admitted there might be some individuals in Eng- 
land, who, by giving information and encouragement to the Americans, 
might be considered guilty of treason by ‘‘adhering to the King’s 
enemies ;” but it was proper that they should be narrowly watched, and 
that the Government should be armed with powers to counteract their 
projects.* 

When the debate arose on Sir Fletcher Norton’s famous speech to 
the King, on the occasion of presenting a bill to aug- [May 9, 1777.] 
ment the civil list,t Thurlow, in trying to do what 
would be agreeable at Court, sustained a signal defeat. Mr. Rigby 
having animadverted upon the speech as disrespectful to the Crown, 
and not conveying the real sentiments of the representatives of the 
people, the Speaker appealed to the House, and threw himself upon 
their judgment. Mr. Fox moved a resolution ‘that the Speaker on 
this occasion did express, with just and proper energy, the zeal of this 
House for the support of the honour and dignity of the Crown in cir- 
cumstances of great public charge.” Sir Fletcher Norton declared 
that he imagined he was acting in the faithful discharge of the trust 
committed to him; but if the House thought otherwise, he could not, 
and would not, remain longer in the chair. Nevertheless, Mr. Attor- 
ney-General Thurlow furiously opposed the motion, and contended that 
“the speech neither contained the sentiments of the House, or was tt 
strictly supported by fuct.” But Fox gave him a severe castigation, 
and pointing out the circumstance that the House had already unani- 
mously thanked the Speaker for this speech, observed that the House 
would never consent to their own degradation and disgrace in the per- 
son of their Speaker, nor would submit to condemn on a Friday what 
they had highly praised on the Wednesday preceding. ‘To Thurlow’s 
extreme mortification, the motion was carried without a division, almost 
unanimously ; and was followed by a fresh vote of thanks to Mr. 
Speaker “ for his said speech to his Majesty.”’t 

Early in the following session of Parliament, Mr. Attorney was 
placed in a very ludicrous situation, which, on ac- [Dec. 2, 1777.] 
count of his extreme arrogance—making him dreaded 
both by friends and foes—seems to have caused not only general mer- 
riment, but general satisfaction. Mr. Fox having moved that there be 
laid before the house certain papers, relating to what had been done 
under the Act for cutting off the Trade of the American Colonies, 
Thurlow rose and inveighed most bitterly against the motion, asserting 


* 19 Parl. Hist. 9, 19, 37, 39. 

+ “In a time of public distress, full of difficulty and danger, their constituents 
labouring under burdens almost too heavy to be borne, your faithful Commons 
postponed all other business; and with as much despatch as the nature of their 
proceedings would admit, have not only granted to your Majesty a large present 
supply, but also a very great additional revenue,—great beyond example,—great 
beyond your Majesty’s highest expense. But all this, Sir, they have done in a 
well-grounded confidence that you will apply wisely what they have granted 
liberally.” &c. { 10 Parl. Hist. 230, 


394 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


that it could only proceed from a desire to countenance the ‘ rebels,” 
and contending that it could not be granted with any regard to the 
dignity of the Crown, or the safety of the state. While he was still on 
his legs, proceeding in this strain, news was brought that in the other 
House the very same motion having been made by the Duke of Grafton, 
the Government had acceded to it, and it had been carried unani- 
mously. The fact was soon known by all present—and Lord North, 
after showing momentary symptoms of being disconcerted, joined in 
the titter. Thurlow pausing, the Secretary to the Treasury whispered 
in his ear the intelligence of what had happened “ elsewhere,” and the 
suppressed mirth broke out into a universal peal of laughter,—from the 
phenomenon that, once in his life, Thurlow appeared to be abashed. 
It was but for an instant. Quickly recovering himself, and looking 
sternly round at the Treasury Bench, he exclaimed, “I quit the defence 
of administration. Let ministers do as they please in this or any other ~ 
House. As a member of Parliament I never will give my vote for 
making public what, according to all the rules of policy, propriety, and 
decency, ought to be kept secret.” ——“* However,” says the Parliamentary 
History, “thts did not stifle the laugh, which continued for some 
tume.”* Lord North was frightened, and standing more in awe of his 
Attorney-General than of his colleagues in the other House, he thought 
it best still to oppose the motion, and it was rejected by a majority of 
178 to 80.+ 

We have no detailed account of any other speech of Thurlow respect- 
ing America while he remained a member of the House of Commons, 
but we know that his tone remained unaltered, and that when disasters 
began to multiply, he imputed them all to the ministers who had re- 
pealed the Stamp Act, and to the opposition leaders, who paralysed the 
energies of the country by their spurious patriotism—insisting that, as 
the “rebels” had had recourse to arms, warlike measures of more 
vigour could alone be expected to decide the controversy.t 

Before closing my account of his career as a representative of the 
fe eople, [ ought in justice to him to mention, that he 
ESE SUA age he would iis oppose Sir George Savile’s bill 
for the relief of Roman Catholics, and that he went so far as to say, ‘that 
he highly disapproved the law which debarred a parent from the noblest 
of all affections, —adopting the system of education which seemed best 
calculated for the happiness of his beloved offspring, — while he would 
require some consideration before he could agreed to Popish priests be- 
ing allowed freely to exercise the functions of their religion.’’§ 

Let us now attend to his forensic efforts while he was at the head of 
[A. v. 1774.] the bar,—which, [ think, are more creditable to him. In 

ire ‘1 Campbell v. Hall, the Grenada case, upon the four-and- 
a-half per cent. duties, he delivered a most admirable argument in sup- 
port of the power of the Crown to legislate for conquered countries ; 
taking a luminous view of the different systems of laws to which our 


* Vol, xix. 518, t Ib. 532. $ Ib. 587. § Ib. 1140. 


LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 395 


colonies are subject, according to the manner in which they were settled 
or acquired.* 

In the Duchess of Kingston’s case—having proved that the collusive 
sentence which she had obtained in the ecclesiastical 
court, annulling her first marriage, though binding upon UAePaihte 24] 

? co) o~) D5 g§ up 

her, was not binding on the House of Lords when trying her for 
bigamy, —he thus sarcastically concluded: ‘*The sentence has de- 
prived her of all conjugal claims upon Mr. Hervey; and we acknow- 
ledge it to be conclusive upon her, while we insist that it is merely void 
against all the rest of the world. She is therefore, according to us, a 
wife only for the purpose of being punished as a felon. These disap- 
pointments, these inconvenient consequences of guilt, are the bars which 
God and the order of nature have set against it; but they have not 
been found sufficient: it demands the interposition of public authority, 
with severer checks, to restrain it. Why is she thus hampered with the 
sentence she fabricated? Because she fabricated it ; because justice will 
not permit her to allege her own fraud for her own benefit, nor hear her 
complain of a wrong done by herself. She displays to your Lordships 
not an anxiety to clear her injured innocence, but a dread of inquiry. 
Was this her solicitude to bring the question here? In such a Court, 
before so venerable an audience, we are to hear nothing pleaded against 
a charge of infamy, but a frivolous objection to enter upon the trial !”” 

The plea being overruled, Thurlow proceeded to state the facts of the 
case against her. His proemium is in a better taste than he often dis- 
plays: ‘My Lords, it seems to be matter of just surprise that, before 
the commencement of the last century, no secular punishment had been 
provided for a crime of this malignant complexion and pernicious ex- 
ample. Perhaps the innocence of simpler ages, or the more prevailing 
influence of religion, or the severity of ecclesiastical censures, together 
with those calamities which naturally and necessarily follow such an 
enormity, might formerly have been found sufficient to restrain it. From 
the moment these causes ceased to produce that effect, imagination can 
scarcely figure a crime that calls more loudly for the interposition of 
penal legislation; a crime which, besides the gross and open scandal 
given by it to religion, implies more cruel disappointment to the just and 
honourable expectation of the persons betrayed by it; which tends more 
to corrupt the purity of domestic life, and to loosen those sacred con- 
nexions and close relations destined by Providence to bind the moral 
world together; or which may create more civil disorder, especially in 


* 20 St. Tr, 312. On this and similar occasions he was ably assisted by his 
“ devils,’ Hargrave and Kenyon, who answered cases for him, got up special argu- 
ments, and enabled him to devote much of his time to Parliament and to jovial 
society. Kenyon was amply rewarded for his services, being made Attorney-Gene- 
ral, Master of the Rolls, and Chief Justice of the King’s Bench. But poor Hargrave 
died neglected. He was, to be sure, with all his learning, hardly produceable in 
any judicial office; and latterly his mind was diseased—insomuch that when he 
was brought to Lincoln’s Inn to vote as a Bencher in the choice of a Preacher, and 
his vote was objected to, Jekyl said, that “instead of being deprived of his vote, he 
ought to be allowed two votes, for he was one beside himself.” : 


396 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


a country where the title to great honours and high office is hereditary. 
My Lords, the misfortunes of individuals, the corruption of private life, 
the confusion of domestic relations, the disorder of civil succession, and 
the offences done to religion, are suggested as aggravations not of the 
particular case now under trial, but as miseries likely to arise from the 
example of the crime in general; and are laid before your Lordships 
only to call your attention to the course and order of the trial, and that 
there may be no misconception to mitigate the atrocity of such a viola- 
tion of law, or to heighten the dangers with which it threatens the peace 
of families, and the public welfare. The present case, to state it justly 
and fairly, is stript of much of its aggravation, The advanced age of 
the parties, and their previous habits of life, would reduce many of 
these general articles of criminality and mischief to idle topics of empty 
declamation. No part of the present complaint turns upon any ruin 
brought on the blameless character of injured innocence ; or to any 
disappointment occasioned to just and honourable pretensions ; or to any 
corruption supposed to be introduced where modesty before prevailed. 
Nor should I expect much serious attention from your Lordships if I 
should urge, as aggravations of the Lady’s guilt, the danger of entail- 
ing an uncertain condition upon a helpless offspring, or the apprehen- 
sion of a disputed succession to the illustrious house of Pierrepont. But 
your Lordships will likewise bear in mind, that every mitigation which 
might have induced you to pity an Eaietinisie passion in younger 
bosoms is entirely cut off here. If it be true that the sacred rites of 
matrimony have been violated, I am afraid it must also appear that dry 
lucre was the only inducement —cold fraud the only means to perpe- 
trate the crime. In truth, the evidence (if I am rightly instructed) will 
clearly and expressly represent it as a matter of perfect indifference to 
the prisoner which husband she adhered to, so that the profit to be 
drawn from this marriage, or from that, was tolerably equal. The 
crime, if less revolting in some particulars, becomes only more odious 
in others. The facts which I will now, with all simplicity, detail, form 
a case which it would be quite impossible to aggravate, and which it 
will be extremely difficult to extenuate.” He then gave an interesting 
narrative of the two marriages, and of the sham sentence of nullity, 
excusing the ecclesiastical Court by the quotation :— 
“ For oft though wisdom wake, suspicion sleeps 
At wisdom’s gate, and to simplicity 
Resigns her charge; while goodness thinks no ill 


Where no ill seems ss 
After the verdict of Gwz2lty, Thurlow, in a strain of rather coarse ban- 
ter, argued that the Duchess was liable either to be hanged or to be 
branded with a hot iron, although he must have been aware that she 


was entitled, by her privilege of peerage, for her first felony to go scot 
free.* 





* 20 St. Tr. 355-651. By 4 & 5 Vict. c. 22, passed after the trial of Lord Car- 
digan, it is enacted that when an indictment is found against a Peer, he shall have 
no privilege except “to be tried by his peers, and that upon conviction he shall be 


b] 


LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 397 


His next encounter in a Court of Justice was with a much more for- 
midable antagonist. On news arriving of the battle of Lexington, a 
meeting to “ sympathize with the Americans,” was held in the City, and 
Parson Horne who superintended it drew up a minute of its proceed- 
ings which he published in the newspapers,—stating that a subscription 
was to be raised ‘‘ to be applied to the relief of the widows, orphans, and 
aged parents of our beloved American fellow-subjects, who, faithful to 
the character of Englishmen, preferring death to slavery, were for that 
reason only inhumanly murdered by the King’s troops at Lexington, in 
the province of Massachusetts.’ For this an ex officio information had 
been filed against him, which came on for trial at Guildhall, before 
Lord Mansfield and a special jury. Mr. Horne was his own counsel, 
and entered the Court resolved to proceed to the utmost lengths in as- 
sailing both the Judge and the prosecutor; but he was new to his situa- 
tion, and did not display much of the cleverness for which he was justly 
celebrated—while Thurlow fought on his own dunghill, and throughout 
the whole day had the advantage over him.* The most amusing scene 
during the trial was when the defendant insisted on calling the Attorney- 
General as his witness: but Lord Mansfield held that none of the ques- 
tions proposed to be put to him were relevant. The jury, with little 
hesitation, brought in a verdict of Gualty. 

Thurlow, in a manner which astonishes a modern Attorney-General, 
eagerly pressed that the defendant, who was an or- [Juuy 4, 1777.] 
dained clergyman of the Church of England, who was 
a scholar and a gentleman, should be set in the pillory. Speaking in 
aggravation of punishment,—after observing that any fine would be paid 
by a seditious subscription, and that imprisonment would be ‘a slight 
inconvenience to one of sedentary habits,” he thus proceeded, ‘ Pillory, 
my Lords, is the appropriate punishment for this species of offence, and 
has been so these two hundred years—not only while such prosecutions 
were rank in the Star Chamber, but since the Star Chamber was 
abolished, and in the best times since the Revolution. ‘Tutchin was set 
in the pillory by Chief Justice Holt. That libeller to be sure complained 
of being subjected to the punishment which he said ought to have been 
reserved for fraudulent bakers, He conceived that the falsifying of 


liable to the same punishment as the rest of her Majesty’s subjects.”—No invidious 
distinction of the peerage now exists, except the action of Scan. Mag. I intended 
to include the abolition of this in my Libel Bill; but I found the manner of doing it 
very difficult, for the action rests on statutes which merely forbid the telling of lies, 
and the spreading of false reports of great men—which it would appear rather absurd 
to repeal. 

* If a defendant under such circumstances has the requisite qualifications for de- 
fending himself, he has a far better chance of acquittal being his own counsel, than 
with the most eloquent man at the bar to speak for him; but the self-defence is 
generally so unskilful that it is snre to end in a conviction. I only recollect two 
instauces to the contrary—Mr. Perry obtained a signal triumph over Sir Vicary 
Gibbs, and Mr. Cobbett over Sir Thomas Denman. But the latter defendant only 
succeeded from the experience he had acquired from several failures. In his first 
contest with Sir James Scarlet he was very feeble and awkward, and he fell an 
easy prey to his powerful antagonist, 


398 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


weights and measures was a more mechanical employment than the 
forging of lies, and that it was less gentlemanlike to rob men of their 
money than of their good name. But this is a peculiarity which belongs 
to the little vanity which inspires an author, and it made no impression 
upon Sir John Holt, whose name will live with honour as long as the 
English constitution, Government cannot exist unless, when offences 
of this magnitude are presented to a Court of Justice, the full measure 
of punishment is inflicted upon them, Let us preserve the restraint 
against licentiousness provided by the wisdom of past ages. I should 
have been very sorry to have brought this man before you, in a case 
attended with so many aggravations, if your Lordships were not to show 
your sense of his infamy by sentencing him to an infamous punish- 
ment.” ‘The sentence, however, was only a fine of 200/. and a year’s 
imprisonment; and even Dr. Johnson, in inquiring about it, said, ‘I 
hope they did not put the dog in the pillory : he has too much literature 
for that.”* During this imprisonment the defendant wrote his letter to 
Mr. Duuning on the * English Particle,” which he enlarged into his 
** Exca asepoevra, or the Diversions of Purley.”—Notwithstanding Thur- 
low’s vigorous push to set him in the pillory (as we shall see), they 
were subsequently reconciled, and the Ex-chancellor visiting the Ex- 
libeller in his retreat at Wimbledon discussed with him questions of 
philology. 

Towards the close of the American war, Mr. Attorney-General Thur- 
low filled a great space in the public eye, and was considered the chief 
prop of the Government. It is certainly difficult for us to understand 
his high parliamentary reputation. I have already noticed all his re- 
ported speeches of the slightest consequence while he remained a mem- 
ber of the House of Commons, and none of them contain anything like 
logical reasoning or statesmanlike views, or even good declamation, 
The defectiveness of the printed reports cannot explain the disappoint- 
ment we feel, for we have most admirable specimens of contemporary 
speakers—not only of Burke, who carefully edited his own orations, 
but of Lord Chatham, Dunning, and Lord North—and even his col- 
league the Solicitor-General, appears in the ‘ Parliamentary History” 
to much greater advantage. He must surely have displayed qualities 
which we cannot justly appreciate, to have been so favourably intro- 
duced into the graphic sketch of the House of Commons at this period, 
from personal observation, by the author of THe Drecrine and Fain 
or THE Roman Empire: ‘“* The cause of government was ably vin- 
dicated by Lord North, a statesman of spotless integrity, a consummate 
master of debate, who could wield with equal dexterity the arms of 
reason and of ridicule, He was seated on the Treasury bench between 
his Attorney and Solicitor-General, the two pillars of the law and state, 
magis pares quam similes ; and the minister might indulge in a short 
slumber, whilst he was upholden on either hand by the majestic sense 
of Thurlow, and the skilful eloquence of Wedderburn.”+ Whatever 


* Bos. iii, 382. Johnson added, * Were I to make a new edition of my Dictionary 
I would adopt several of Mr. Horne’s etymologies.” 
t Gib. Mem, i. 146. 


o—_—- 





LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 399 


others might think of him, he gave high satisfaction to his employers. 
Above all, the King was excessively delighted with his strong and un- 
compromising language respecting the Americans, and long placed a 
greater personal confidence in him than he had done in Lord Bute, or 
than he ever did in any other minister—perhaps with the exception of 
Lord Eldon. 

The government being hard pressed in debate, though strong in num- 
bers in the House of Lords, and the general inefficiency of Lord 
Bathurst producing serious inconvenience to the public [Jone, 1778.] 
service, it was resolved to accept the offer he had made : 4 
to resign his office of Chancellor,—and there was not a moment’s hesi- 
tation about his successor. 


CHAPTER CLVII. 


CONTINUATION OF THE LIFE OF LORD THURLOW TILL THE RESIGNA- 
TION OF LORD NORTH AND THE FORMATION OF THE SECOND ROCK- 
INGHAM ADMINISTRATION, 


Tue transfer of the Great Seal took place at a council held at St. 
James’s, on the 3d of June, 1778,—when Thurlow was sworn in Lord 
Chancellor, and a member of the Privy Council,— 
and on the first day of the following Trinity Term, A ibatlesds Gadliaee 
after a procession from his house in Great Ormond Street to Westmin- 
ster Hall, he was installed in the Court of Chancery with all the usual 
solemnities.* At the same time he was raised to the peerage by the 
title of Baron Tuurtow of Ashfield, in the county of Suffolk. 

A striking homage was now paid to his success by Cowper, the poet, 
who, though sincere and disinterested, exaggerated his merits, and was 
blind to his imperfections, from a tender recollection of their intimacy 
when brother pupils and idlers in the office of Mr. Chapman, in Lin- 
coln’s Inn :— . 


* «3d June, 1778, Memorandum.—The Right Honourable Henry Earl Bathurst, 
Lord High Chancellor of Great Britain, delivered the Great Seal to his Majesty in 
Council. His Majesty, on the said 3d day of June, delivered it to Edward Thurlow, 
Esq., with the title of Lord Chancellor of Great Britain, who was thereupon, by his 
Majesty’s command, sworn of the Privy Council, and likewise Lord High Chancellor, 
of Great Britain, and took his place at the board accordingly ; and on Friday, the 
19th of June, went in state from his house in Great Ormond Street to Westminster 
Hall, accompanied by the Judges, Serjeants, &c., where, in their presence, he took 
the oaths of allegiance and supremacy, and the oath of the Lord Chancellor of Great 
Britain, the Master of the Rolls holding the book, and the Deputy Clerk of the 
Crown reading the, said oaths. Which being done, the Solicitor-General moved 
that it might be recorded, and it was ordered accordingly.”—Cr. Of. Min. Book, 
sao, 2, f. 25, 


400 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


“Round Thurlow’s head in early youth 
And in his sportive days, 
Fair Science pour’d the light of truth, 
And Genius shed his rays. 


*¢* See,’ with united wonder, cried 
Th’ experienc’d and the sage, 
‘ Ambition in a boy supplied 
With all the skill of age! 


“* Discernment, eloquence, and grace 
Proclaim him born to sway 
The balance in the highest place, 
And bear the palm away.’ 


“The praise bestow’d was just and wise: 
He sprang impetuous forth 
Secure of conquest, where the prize 
Attends superior worth. 


“So the best courser on the plain 
Ere yet he starts is known, 
And does but at the goal obtain 

What all had deem’d his own.” 


The new Chancellor did not disappoint public expectation, and as 
long as.he enjoyed the prestige of office, he contrived to persuade man- 
kind that he was a great judge, a great orator, and a great statesman,— 
although I am afraid that in all these capacities he was considerably _ 
overrated, and that he owed his temporary reputation very much to his 
high pretensions and his awe-inspiring manners. 

He was tolerably well qualified to preside in the Court of Chancery 
from his natural shrewdness, from the knowledge of law which he had 
acquired by fits and starts, and from his having been for some years 
in full practice as an equity counsel. But he had never devoted himself 
to jurisprudence systematically ; he was almost entirely unacquainted 
with the Roman civil Jaw as well as with the modern codes of the con- 
tinental nations, and, unlike Lord Nottingham, Lord Hardwicke, and 
the Chancellors whose memory we venerate, upon his elevation to the 
Bench he despised the notion of entering on a laborious course of study 
to refresh and extend his juridical acquirements. Much engrossed by 
politics, and spending a large portion of his time in convivial society or 
in idle gossip with his old coffee-house friends, he was contented if he 
could only get through the business of his Court without complaints 
being made against him by the suitors, or any very loud murmurs from 
the public. Permanent fame he disregarded or despised. He was above 
all taint or suspicion of corruption, and in his general rudeness he was 
very impartial; but he was not patient and pains-taking ; he sometimes 
dealt recklessly with the rights which he had to determine, and he did 
little in settling controverted questions or establishing general principles. 
Having been at the head of the law of this country for near thirteen 
years, he never issued an order to correct any of the abuses of his own 
Court, and he never brought forward in Parliament any measure to im- 
prove the administration of justice. 





LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 401 


He is said to have called in Hargrave, the very learned editor of 
Coke upon Littleton, to assist him in preparing his judgments, and 
some of them show labour and research; but he generally seems to 
have decided off-hand without very great anxiety about former autho- 
rities, 

Frequently he employed Mr. Justice Buller, a very acute special 
pleader and nisi prius lawyer, to sit for him in the Court of Chancery. 
On resuming his seat he would highly eulogise the decisions of ‘“ one 
whom he, in common with all the world, felt bound to respect and ad- 
mire.” But being privately asked ‘“ how Buller had acquired his 
knowledge of Equity?” “ Equity !” said he; ‘*he knows no more of 
it than a horse, but he disposes somehow of the cases, and I seldom 
hear more of them.” 

So fiercely did he spring on a luckless counsel or solicitor, that he 
generally went by the name of the “ Tiger,” and sometimes they would, 
out of compliment, call him the ‘ Lion,”—adding that Hargrave was 
his “‘ provider.” 

His habit of profane swearing he could not always control, even 
when on the Bench, and those who were sitting under him near the 
Mace and the Purse, occasionally heard a muttering of strange oaths. 
Yet some supposed that, in reality, he had a great deal of good. humour 
under an ostentatiously rough exterior, and of this he would occasion- 
ally give symptoms, It is related that once, at the adjournment of the 
Court for the long vacation, he was withdrawing without taking the 
usual leave of the Bar, when a young barrister exclaimed in a stage 
whisper,—‘‘ He might at least have said d n you!” ‘The Chan- 
cellor hearing the remark, returned, and politely made his bow.* 

Thurlow is handed down to us as a Judge by Brown, Vesey junior, 
and Dickens. It may be partly their fault, but he certainly appears in 
their Reports to little advantage. His judgments are not only immea- 
surably inferior to those of such a consummate master of juridical 
reasoning as Sir William Grant, but are not by any means equal to 
those of ‘Pepper Arden, for whom Thurlow was accustomed to testify 
such ineffable contempt. 

I will bring before the reader a few of his decisions which appear to 
me to be the most important and interesting. In’ Bishop of London v. 
Fytche,t the question arose ‘ whether bonds given: by an incumbent to 
the patron of a living for resigning on request, are lawful.” ‘The 
Chancellor gave a strong opinion in “favour of their legality, insisting 
that they not only were not simoniacal, but that they were not contrary 
to public policy, and that being properly controlled by a court of equity, 
they might be very salutary. “He repeated this opinion with great bold- 
ness when the question came before the House of Lords. But the 
Judges being consulted, were divided upon it, and the Bishops taking 
the contrary side and voting,—there was a reversal by a majority of 
19 to 18, so that general resignation bonds have since been unlawful, 





* Hawkins’s Memoirs, ii. 312. t 1 Brown, 96, 
VoL. Vv. 26 


402 REIGN OF GEORGE IIL. 


although there may still be a bond conditioned for the resignation of 
the incumbent, on the patron’s son coming of age and being in holy 
orders.* ; 

In Cason v. Dale, Lord Chancellor Thurlow held upon the * Statute 
of Frauds,” which requires that a will of lands shall be subscribed by 
the witnesses in the presence of the testator, that a will was well exe- 
cuted where a lady, who made it, having signed it in an attorney’s 
office, got into her carriage, and the carriage was accidentally backed 
by the coachman opposite to the window of the office, so that if she had 
been inclined, she might have let down the glass of the carriage, and 
seen the witnesses subscribe the will.t 

In Jones v. Morgan,* in which the industry of Mr, Hargrave may 
be pretty clearly traced, the Chancellor obtained great glory by over- 
turning a decision of Lord Hardwicke, and holding that the same con- 
struction is to be given to limitations in wills of trusts and legal estates. 
He likewise delivered a very elaborate judgment in Pultney v. Earl of 
Darlington,§ (which could hardly have been composed by Hargrave, 
for he was counsel in the cause,) establishing the doctrine now recog- 
nised, that where either land is directed to be converted into money, or 
money to be laid out in land—from the moment the direction might 
have been executed the property receives the impression either of per- 
sonalty or realty, with all the incidents of either estate. This case 
being brought before the House of Lords by appeal, the decree was 
affirmed, 

Thurlow’s decision in Ackroyd v. Smithson,|| was the foundation of 
Lord Eldon’s fortune at the bar, and may be said to have made him 
Lord Chancellor. A testator ordered his real and personal property to 
be sold, and the fund to be divided among certain legatees. ‘Two of 
them died in his lifetime: The question was, what was to become of 
their shares? Sir Thomas Sewell, M-.R., held against the argument of 
Mr. Scott, who, after being above a year briefless, had a guinea brief 
for the heir at law, that the whole should be distributed among the sur- 
viving legatees. Upon an appeal brought by other parties, Mr. Scott 
had another guinea brief to consent, on the part of the heir at law, to 
an affrmance; but having a strong opinion that he was right, he ar- 
gued the case so zealously and ably, that Thurlow was much struck 
with the manner of the unknown counsel; and, after high compliments 
to him, reversed the decree,—deciding that the shares of the deceased 
legatees were lapsed legacies, and that so much of them as arose out of 
the real estate should go to the heir at law. Lord Eldon, in relating 
the story, used to add, “ As I left the Hall a respectable solicitor, of the 

* Brown’s Parl. Cas. ii. 211. 

+ 1 Brown, 39; Dickens, 586. But it is necessary that the testator should be in 
such a position as that, by possibility, he may have scen the witnesses sign the will, 
if so disposed, Doe v. Manifold, 1 Maule and Selw. 294; although if he might see 
them from any one part of a room in which he was, and there be no evidence in 
what part of the room he was placed, it will be presumed that he was where he 


might have seen the witnesses. Winchelsea v. Wauchope, 3 Russ. 444. 
t 1 Brown, 206. § Ib. 223. || Ib. 503. 


LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 403 


name of Forster, came up, touched me on the shoulder, and said, 
‘ Young man, you have cut your bread and butter, or ‘ Your bread 
and butter is cut for life”? And business thenceforth flowed in upon 
him, although, till after another lucky hit, he still desired to become 
Recorder of Newcastle, and to practise as a provincial counsel.* 

In Newman v. Wallis,t our Chancellor most unaccountably held, 
with great positiveness, that where a plaintiff claims an estate as an 
heir at law, and prays a discovery, it is not a good plea that he ts not 
heir at law; but in the subsequent case of Hall v. Noyes,t he was 
driven to retract this opinion, and it is now fully settled that such a 
plea is good, although a defendant cannot, by a plea denying the prin- 
cipal fact, evade a discovery of the collateral facts connected with it. 

In the Countess of Strathmore v. Bowes,§ where the Lady had 
settled all her property to her separate use, meaning to marry one man, 
and then, by a stratagem, was induced to marry another who was 
ignorant of the settlernent, Thurlow established the settlement against 
the husband, observing in his characteristic manner :—‘ As to the 
morality of the transaction, I shall say nothing. They seem to have 
been pretty well matched. Marriage, in general, seems to have been 
Lady Strathmore’s object; she was disposed to marry anybody, so that 
at the same time she might keep her fortune to herself. But the question 
is, has there been a fraud upon the husband? It is impossible for a man 
marrying in the manner Bowes did to come into Equity and talk of 
fraud. 

Ex parte O’Reilly|| was the first of a long. string of opera-house 
cases, which have perplexed Chancellors ever since. The Italian 
Opera House, in the Haymarket, having been burnt down, a patent for 
thirty-one years had been granted to the petitioner to enable him to 
build a new theatre upon the site of Leicester House, in Leicester Square, 
and the question was, whether the Great Seal should be put to this 
patent? ‘The grant was opposed by the patentees of all the other 
theatres, and of incumbrancers and others who had an interest in them. 
After a hearing of four days, ‘Thurlow said :—* All parties seem to 
agree that an opera house is a proper establishment in this country, but 
you will not expect me to determine which of these plans is the best. 
My Office is to see that the King is not deceived, and that he does not 
part with any authority which he ought to retain. Many considerations 
require that public establishments of this nature should be in the hands 
of the King. In the time of James I., as in the time of Queen Eliza- 
beth, masques and such diversions were under the direction of the 
Crown—executed partly by the Lord Chamberlain, but more immedi- 
ately by the Master of the Revels. On the same notion the patent was 
granted by Charles II. to Killigrew and Davenant, and by Queen Anne 
to Collier and Sir Richard Steele. But this patent is bad, as it contains 
covenants with the Lord Chamberlain, and it does not sufficiently con- 
nect the grant with the property. It is calculated to create innumerable 


* Twiss’s Life of Eldon, i, 117. + 2 Brown, 143. 
t 3 Brown, 489. § 1 Vesey, Jun. 22. || Tb. 112. 


404 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


Jawsuits. I should soon be obliged to direct the Master to take the manage- 
ment of the opera house into his own hands—a task for which, I may 
venture to say, all the masters, notwithstanding their great learning and 
experience as officers of this Court, are as unfit as myself. Dismissing 
the petition, I shall make a fit representation on the subject to his 
Majesty, who, I am sure, will do justice to the parties and to the 
public.” 

Thurlow generally disdained to resort to the practice now very 
common, and found highly beneficial, of delivering written judgments ; 
but I find one judgment, which the Reporter says, “ His Lordship hav- 
ing read, gave it to me,”—and I do very much suspect that it is the 
composition of his “ Devil,” for the style of it is very quiet and mode- 
rate, and it enters a good deal into the civil law. The case is Scott v. 
Tyler, in which the important question arose, whether a condition 
annexed to a legacy, “that the legatee shall not marry without the 
consent of her mother,” be void, as being in restraint of marriage, so 
that the legacy shall be considered absolute? ‘‘ To support the affirma- 
tive,” he said, ‘innumerable decisions of this court were quoted ; but 
the cases are so short, and the dicta so general, as to afford me no dis- 
tinct view of the principle on which the rule is laid down, or, conse- 
quently, of the extent of the rule, or of the nature of the exceptions to 
which its own principle makes it liable.” Having given the history of 
the decisions on the subject in this country, and stated how it is viewed 
by the canon law, he proceeds: “ By the civil law, the provision of a 
child was considered a debt of nature, the payment of which the preetor 
would enforce; insomuch, that a will was regarded as énofficious by 
which the. child was disinherited without just cause. By the positive 
institutions of that law, it was also declared, Sz guts calibatis, vel 
viduitatis conditionem heredi, legatoriove injunzerit; heres, lega- 
toriusve € conditione libert sunto ; neque eo minus delatam hereditatem, 
legatumve, ex hac lege, consequantur. In ampliation of this law, it 
seems to have been well settled in all times, that if, instead of creating 
a condition absolutely enjoining celibacy or widowhood, the matter be 
referred to the advice or discretion of another, particularly an interested 
person, it is deemed a fraud on the law, and treated accordingly; that 
is, the condition so imposed is holden for void. On the other hand, the 
ancient rule of the civil law has suffered much limitation in descending 
to us. ‘The case of widowhood is altogether excepted by the Nove.s; 
and injunctions to keep that state are made lawful conditions. So is 
every condition which does not directly or indirectly import an absolute 
injunction to celibacy. ‘Therefore, an injunction to ask consent, or not 
to marry a widow, is not unlawful. A condition to marry or not to 
marry Titius or Meevia is good, for this reason that it implies no general 
restraint ; besides, in the first case, it seems to have in view a bounty to 
Titius or Meevia. In like manner, the injunction which prescribes due 
ceremonies, and the place of marriage, is a lawful condition, and is not 
understood as operating the general prohibition of marriage. Still more 
is a condition good, which only limits the time to twenty-one, or any 


LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 405 


other reasonable age, provided this be not evasively used as a covered 
purpose to restrain marriage generally.” After proceeding in this tone 
at great length,—without abusing any body, or uttering any thing ap- 
proaching to imprecation,—he drily decides, that the young lady, hav- 
ing married at eighteen without her mother’s consent, was not entitled 
to the legacy. Perhaps, in the delivery, a few strong expletives were 
interpolated, to avoid the suspicion that the real author was the meek 
and placid Hargrave.* 

In Thurlow’s time there were heavy complaints of delays in Chan- 
cery. These, no doubt, arose partly from the peculiar nature of equity 
suits, which often being between a multiplicity of parties, and depending 
on complicated inquiries—are not capable of being rapidly settled like 
a single issue of fact in an action at law,—but there seems reason to 
think that arrears accumulated from the want of industry and exertion 
on the part of the Judge. He was rather pleased to be called away to 
Cabinets and to the House of Lords, and he would not make that sacri- 
fice of time out of Court to the consideration of pending cases, without 
which no Judge can do justice to himself or the suitors. He went on 
uncomfortably with his Master of the Rolls, except for the short time 
that Sir Lloyd Kenyon held that oflice; he was at variance with Sir 
Thomas Sewell, and he refused contemptuously to co-operate with 
Pepper Arden, whose appointment he had strenuously opposed,—saying 
to Mr. Pitt, «1 care not whom the devil you appoint, so that he does not 
throw his own damned wallet on my shoulders, instead of lightening my 
burden,” 

To finish the sketch of Thurlow as a Judge, it may be convenient to 
state here that he gave considerable satisfaction in disposing of writs of 
error and appeals in the House of Lords. In all English cases, he 
summoned the Judges, and was guided by their opinion, ‘The Scotch 
cases sometimes puzzled him, as he was neither a great feudalist nor 
civilian, but his own practice in Scotch appeals when at the bar had 
rendered him tolerably familiar with the procedure of the Court of Ses- 
sion ; after the able arguments at the bar, he could generally guess at 
the conclusion with considerable confidence ; and he had always in 
reserve the comfortable resource of affirming without giving any 
reasons, 

The most important case which the House decided by his advice, was 
Bruce v. Bruce ; in which Major Bruce, a son of the famous Abyssinian 
traveller, having been born in Scotland, and having died in India in the 
service of the East India Company, the question arose by what law the 
succession to his personal property, which was partly in India and partly 
in England, was to be governed? The Court of Session decided, that 
the law of England should prevail as the dex loci rei site, Lord Thur- 
low was of opinion that the judgment was right—but only on the ground 
that the intestate had died domecz/ed in India. When he agreed with the 
decision of the Court below, he had hitherto simply declared that the 


* 2 Dickens, 712. 


406 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


judgment was affirmed. On this occasion, however, he spoke as follows : 
‘«‘ As I have no doubt that the decree ought to be affirmed, I would not 
have troubled your Lordships by delivering my reasons, had I not been 
pressed with some anxiety from the bar, that if there was to be an 
affirmance, the grounds of*the determination should be stated,—to pre- 
vent its being understood that the whole doctrine laid down by the Judges 
of the Court of Session had the sanction of this House. The true ground 
upon which the cause turns is the Indian domicile. ‘The deceased was 
born in Scotland; but a person’s origin is only one circumstance to be 
regarded in considering by what law the succession to his personal 
property is to be regulated. A person being at a place is, prima. facie, 
evidence that he is domiciled at that place. It may be rebutted, no 
doubt. A person may be travelling; on a visit; he may be there fora 
lime, on account of health or business. A soldier may be ordered to 
Flanders, and an ambassador may be sent to Madrid, where they may 
remain many months; England is still their domicile or home. But if 
a British man settles as a merchant abroad, and carries on business there, 
enjoying the privileges of the place, and dies there, his original domicile 
is gone; although, had he survived, he might possibly have returned to 
end his days in his native country. Let it be granted, that Major Bruce 
meant to return to Scotland ; he then meant to change his domicile, but 
he died before actually changing it. All the discussion we have had 
respecting the dex loci ret site is immaterial. Personal property, in 
point of law, has no locality ; and, in case of the decease of the owner, 
must go wherever, in point of fact, situate, according to the law of the 
country where he had his domicile. ‘To say that the dex loct ret site is 
to govern the succession to personal as it does to real property, the 
domicilium of the deceased being without contradiction in another coun- 
try, is a gross misapplication of the rules of the civil law and jus gentium ; 
though the law of Scotland, on this point, is constantly asserted to be 
founded upon them.”* : 

Thurlow took his seat in the House of Lords rather irregularly on 
the 14th of July, 1778,—to which day Parliament had been prorogued 
at the conclusion of the preceding session. The Houses now met not 
for the despatch of business, but only to be again prorogued; and, 
without a speech from the throne stating the causes of the summons, I 
doubt whether any business whatever can properly be done. Perhaps 
Thurlow ought to have merely occupied the woolsack as Speaker—but 
the Journal of this day contains the following entry: ‘* The Lord 
Viscount Weymouth signified to the House that his Majesty had been 
pleased to create Edward Thurlow, Esq., Lord High Chancellor of 
Great Britain, by the style and title of Baron Thurlow, of Ashfield, in 
the county of Suffolk: whereupon his Lordship, taking in his hand the 
purse with the Great Seal, retired to the lower end of the House, and, 


* Robertson’s Law of Personal Succession, 121. A still more important case 
from Scotland, before Lord Thurlow, on the conflict of laws, was Hog v. Lashley (ib. 
126); but as he simply affirmed, without saying a word upon any of the important 
questions which it involved, I must reluctantly pass it over without further notice, 


LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 407 


having there put on his robes, was introduced between the Lord Osborne 
and Lord Amherst, also in their robes; the Yeoman Usher of the Black 
Rod, Clarencieux King at Arms (who in the absence of Garter officiated 
on this occasion) in his coat of arms, carrying his Lordship’s patent 
(which he delivered to him at the steps before the throne), and the Earl 
of Clarendon (who officiated in the ceremony in the absence of the Lord 
Great Chamberlain of England) preceding. His Lordship (after three 
obeisances) laid down his letters patent upon the chair of state, and from 
thence took and delivered them to the clerk, who read the same at the 
table,” &c. The entry goes on to state the writ of summons, the taking 
of the oaths, &c., and that his Lordship ‘* was afterwards placed on the 
lower end of the Baron’s bench, and from thence went to the upper end 
of the Earl’s bench, and sat there as Lord Chancellor, and then his 
Lordship returned to the woolsack. Clarencieux King at Arms delivered 
in at the table his Lordship’s pedigree pursuant to the standing order,” 
The prorogation then took place. At the opening : 

of the a inter badidtors . the 26th of November [Pee 7 shades] 

following, the Lord Chancellor on his knee delivered to George III. the 
royal speech, announcing that France had gone to war, and was assist- 
ing the revolted colonies in America.* He abstained from taking part 
in the debate which followed upon the address; but on Lord Rocking- 
ham’s motion a few days after, respecting the proclamation issued by 
the English Commissioners in America, he made his maiden speech as 
a Peer, and showed that he had not changed his disposition with his 
rank. He at once poured red hot shot into the whole of the opposition. 
He began with Hinchcliffe, Bishop of Peterborough, who had inveighed 
against the employment of savages in carrying on the war in America, 
had objected to an item in the army extraordinaries, “ scalping-knives 
and crucifixes for the Indians,”’—had declared that if such was the 
Christianity we were to teach them, it would be better that they should 
never hear of the name of Christ,—and was understood to lament the 
** fruitless desolation” which such measures produced.—Lord Chan- 
cellor. ‘The Right Reverend Prelate talks of ¢ fruitless desolation, — 
an expression which carries no meaning, and is neither sense nor gram- 
mar, It is not supported by any figure of speech, or by any logic, or 
even by any vulgarism that I ever heard of. ‘ Fruitless desolation,’ my 
Lords, is rank nonsense. I was not aware before that ‘ desolation’ 
might be ¢ fruitful.’ To negative what is not to be found in nature, and 
what the imagination cannot conceive, is a species of oratory—not only 
incongruous, but so nonsensical, that it admits of no answer.” He 
next addressed himself to an observation of the Duke of Grafton, who 
had said that ministers carried their measures by corruption: ‘ this,” 
he said, ‘was well calculated for the temporary purpose of debate, 
as it required no proof, and admitted of no refutation; and this was all 
that was intended by it; but he hoped that it would have a contrary 
effect, and that an impartial nation would honour and respect those 


* 19 Parl. Hist. ‘1277. 


408 REIGN OF GEORGE IIlL 


against whom nothing could be brought, except such indiscriminate and 
ill-founded charges.” He then attacked the Duke of Richmond and 
Lord Shelburne with equal acrimony, and concluded by declaring that 
‘‘ having in vain appealed to the reason and good sense of America, the 
only course was to endeavour to influence by their fears those who could 
not be wrought upon by the nobler principles of affection, generosity, or 
gratitude.” The Bishop of Peterborough explaining, said, the expression 
he had used was * fruitless evils,” not ‘fruitless desolation,” although 
he contended that a desolation from which no good consequences was 
ever promised or expected, might well be termed a “ fruitless desolation.” 
—The Lord Chancellor. ‘1 beg pardon of the Right Reverend Prelate, 
if I have mistaken his words. But, my Lords, Iam equally at a loss 
to know what sort of ‘evils’ are ‘ fruitful’—except of evil. Are some 
evils productive of good? Let the Right Reverend Prelate more dis- 
tinctly classify his evils; for at present I am at a loss to distinguish be- 
tween evils that are fruitless and evils that are fruitful.” He had an 
explanation almost equally uncourteous with Lord Shelburne; but he 
received a calm and dignified rebuke from Lord Camden, who asserted 
the import of the proclamation in question to be “ We have tried our 
strength; we find ourselves incapable of conquest, and as we can’t sub- 
due we are determined to destroy.” As yet the opposition in the Lords 
could only muster 37 to 71.* 

Thurlow spoke several times on the bill for allowing Keppel to be 
tried by a naval court-martial on shore,—allowing it to pass pretty qui- 
etly after a few sarcasms on the Admiral and his supporters.t He then 
caused considerable dissatisfaction in the House, by at first refusing to 
put a motion which had been regularly made for the erection of a bar 
between the woolsack and the steps of the throne,—on the ground that 
the object of it was to accommodate members of the House of Com- 
mons,—which was contrary to the standing order for the exclusion of 
strangers ;—but he was forced to put it, and to negative it by the minis- 
terial majority.t On other occasions, about this time, his manner gave 
offence to several Peers, and by way of apology he declared “ that he 
never presumed to rise and control the sense of the House, but in in- 
stances in which the form of their proceedings was about to be de- 
parted from.’’§ 

He was becoming highly unpopular, and as his demeanour on the 
woolsack was very much like that of Lord Chancellor Jeffreys,—if a 
proper course had been pursued to check him, he might have been put 
down as effectually ; but, luckily for him, instead of being reprimanded 
for his arrogant manners, he was taunted with his mean birth,—an op- 
portunity was offered to him, which he daringly and dexterously im- 
proved, of exalting himself,—and the suppressed rebellion ended in his 
establishing a permanent tyranny over the whole body of the Peerage. 

We have a very lively account of this scene from an eyewitness. 


* 20 Parl. Hist. 1-46, 
t 20 Parl. Hist. 94, 95, 102, 105, 110, t Ib. 470, 473. § Ib. 588. 


LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 409 


** At times,” says Mr, Butler in his Reminiscences, ‘ Lord J oe 
Thurlow was superlatively great. It was the good for- poner) 
tes ys g 

tune of the Reminiscent to hear his celebrated reply to the Duke of 
Grafton during the inquiry into Lord Sandwich’s administration of 
Greenwich Hospital. His Grace’s action and delivery, when he ad- 
dressed the House, were singularly dignified and graceful ; but his mat- 
ter was not equal to his manner. He reproached Lord Thurlow with 
his plebeian extraction and his recent admission into the Peerage: 
particular circumstances caused Lord Thurlow’s reply to make a deep 
impression on the Reminiscent. His Lordship had spoken too often, 
and began to be heard with a civil but visible impatience.* Under these 
circumstances he was attacked in the manner we have mentioned. He 
rose from the woolsack, and advanced slowly to the place from which 
the Chancellor generally addresses the House,t then fixing on the Duke 
the look of Jove when he grasped the thunder, ‘I am amazed,’ he said 
in a loud tone of voice, ‘ at the attack the noble Duke has made on me. 
Yet, my Lords,’ considerably raising his voice, ‘I am amazed at his 
Grace’s speech. The noble Duke cannot look before him, behind him, 
or on either side of him, without seeing some noble Peer who owes his 
seat in this House to successful exertions in the profession to which I 
belong. Does he not feel that it is as honourable to owe it to these, as 
to being the accident of an accident? ‘To all these noble Lords the lan- 
guage of the noble Duke is as applicable and as insulting as it is to my- 
self. But I don’t fear to meet it single and alone. No one venerates 
the Peerage more than I do; but, my Lords, I must say, that the Peer- 
age solicited me, not I the Peerage. Nay, more, [ can say, and will 
say, that as a Peer of Parliament, as Speaker of this right honourable 
House, as Keeper of the Great Seal, as guardian of his Majesty’s con- 
science, as Lord High Chancellor of England, nay, even in that cha- 
racter alone, in which the noble Duke would think it an affront to be 
considered—as a Man—I[ am at this moment as respectable,—I beg 
leave to add,—I am at this moment as much respected—as the proudest 
Peer | now look down upon.’ The effect of this speech, both within 
the walls of Parliament and out of them, was prodigious. It gave Lord 
Thurlow an ascendency in the House which no Chancellor had ever 
possessed: it invested him in public opinion with a character of inde- 
pendence and honour; and this, though he was ever on the unpopular 
side in politics, made him always popular with the people.’’t 

I myself have seen striking instances in a public assembly of the 
cowardice of brave men, who forget that before an effort of moral 
courage arrogance quails, From this time every Peer shrunk from the 
risk of any encounter with Thurlow, and he ruled the House with a rod 
of iron—saying and doing what he pleased, and treating his colleagues 
with very little more courtesy than his sal aa He was soon de- 
scribed as, 


* I conjecture that he had given umbrage by his dictatorial tone much more than 
by the frequency of his speeches. ssa 
t The top of the Duke’s bench, t Reminisce. i, 142, 


410 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


“ That ragged Thurlow, who, with silent scowl, 
In surly mood at friend and foe would growl. ” 


The Parliamentary History says, that on the next measure which 
was brought forward, ** the Lord Chancellor spoke with peculiar feel- 
ing, force, and argument ;” but I cannot help suspecting that his speech 
was an example of grave irony, and that in his heart he was lawghing, 
and wished the discerning to know that he was laughing, at the sus- 
picious claims to high blood of some of those who despised the descend- 
ant of the “Carrier.” This was Bishop Barrington’s bill “ for the 
more effectual discouragement of the crime of Adultery.” A Howard,— 
the Earl of Carlisle—having ably opposed it on the ground that adul- 
tery, though a deadly sin, was not a subject for criminal legislation,— 
he was answered with great seeming warmth by Lord Thurlow, who 
had not only been noted for youthful profligacy, but, now the first magis- 
trate under the Crown, and Keeper (as he boasted) of the King’s con- 
science, was openly living with a mistress, by whom he had a family 
of children. He said, ‘the matter immediately before the House was, 
whether or no they would take into consideration a method for more 
effectually preventing the crime of adultery? If they rejected the bill, 
they pronounced in form that they were not disposed to put any restraint 
at all upon this abominable practice. The plain question was, ‘ Do you, 
or do you not, think it worth your while to interpose by some method 
for the prevention of a crime that not only subverts domestic tranquil- 
lity, but has a tendency, by contaminating the blood of illustsious fami- 
lies, to affect the welfare of the nation in its dearest interests?’ The 
bill was for the ‘ protection’ of every husband and father in the king- 
dom ; but tt concerned their Lordships more than any other order in 
the slate, He begged the House to recollect that the purity of the blood 
of their descendants was and must necessarily be an essential conside- 
ration in the breasts of all Peers. Every attempt to preserve the descent 
of Peers unstained merited their immediate attention: for his part, he 
declared he saw the ¢mportance of the bill to the Peerage so clearly, that 
if he had the blood of forty generations of nobility flowing in his veins, 
he could not be more anxious to procure for it that assent which it de- 
served from their Lordships.”* No puritan could have more vehemently 
supported the ordinance passed in the time of the Commonwealth, by 
which fornication was made felony, and on a second conviction was to 


be punished with death. ‘ A knavish speech sleeps in a foolish ear,” 


and this perstflage of the Lord Chancellor was taken in good earnest 
by a large majority of their Lordships: but the bill which they passed 
was thrown out by the Commons—where the professed “ Protection ” 
was considered less necessary. 

Some alarm being excited by the discontents of Ireland, which soon 


* 20 Parl. Hist. 594. 

+ 20 Parl. Hist. 601, Its absurdities were forcibly pointed out by Charles Fox, 
wha, in allusion to Thurlow’s indecent sarcasm on the “ Peeresses,”’ pointed out the 
extreme hardship to which the female sex were exposed in not being allowed to sit 
in Parliament, and having no representatives there. 


LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 411 


after led to the assertion of independence by an armed force, Lord Shel- 
burne brought forward certain propositions for repealing the laws which 
restricted the intercourse between the two islands, so that both might 
have a common interest in prosecuting commerce. Thurlow strongly 
opposed what he called ‘a dangerous innovation ;” and his colleagues, 
showing some symptoms of giving way, he declared ‘‘ that though he 
did not wish in general to take the lead, nor pretend to determine on 
matters of state, which were foreign to his studies and habits of life, on 
the present occasion he would act for himself, and meet the motion with 
a direct negative.” This course was adopted, and he had a majority of 
61 to 32.* 

At the opening of the session, in November, 1779, after the con- 
tinuing disasters of the war, the Marquis of Rockingham, with good 
reason, and at all events regularly and constitutionally, having moved 
an amendment to the address, praying for a change of councils 
and councillors, it was thus opposed by the Lord Chancellor: ‘ Al- 
lowing all the suggestions of: the noble Marquis to be as true as 
they are unfounded, would it be just—would it be fair, either in point 
of form or fact, to condemn, without hearing or inquiring what the 
parties accused have to say in defence or extenuation? Ido not rise 
as an advocate for any man, or description of men—much less for the 
persons supposed to compose the present administration ;—but I stand 
up for the honour of the House. If ministers have acted improperly, 
injudiciously, corruptly, or wickedly, the very presumption that they 

have done so entitles them to claim a trial. J will suppose they are cul- 
prits. ‘That is enough for my argument; they are entitled to the benefit 
of the laws. The higher the charge,—the heavier the punishment,— 
the more caution is required in bringing home guilt to the accused. But 
to come by a side-wind—without notice—without evidence, and at once 
to condemn,—is a mode of proceeding which I cannot sanction. It is 
an outrage on the constitution; it is contrary to candour—to law—to 
truth, and to every requisite of substantial justice.’ Lord Camden 
made a forcible reply to this ‘novel logic,” but the amendment was 
-negatived by a majority of 82 to 41.f 
The Chancellor most resolutely set his face against all the economical 
and constitutional reforms which Burke, Dunning, and the Whigs were 
now able to carry through the lower House, where upon such subjects 
ats had a Apo bap tin But their bills soon ally [Aprit, 1780.] 
e coup de grace on reaching the House of Lords. 
The bill to disqualify government contractors from sitting in the House 
of Commons, although it had passed there almost unanimously, he 
‘threw out by a majority of 92 to 51, saying that “ the fact that the bill 
had in its favour the general wishes of the people, was worth just so 
much as it would pass for in their lordship’s estimation.” 
There being a motion in the House of Lords against the employment 
of the military to put down Lord George Gordon’s riots, [Mav, 1780 
the Chancellor, in a speech not confined to assertion and 


* 20 Parl, Hist. 675, t 20 Parl. Hist. 1023-1092. t Ib. 433, 





412 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


vituperation, but containing an unusual display of reasoning, legal 
learning, and historical research, proved, in a very able and satisfactory 
manner, that citizens with arms in their hands still enjoy the rights, 
and are liable to the duties of citizens, and are bound, like other citi- 
zens, to assist in preserving or restoring the public tranquillity. He 
[Junz, 1780.] likewise gained considerable credit with the judicious 
; for his continued support of Sir George Savile’s bill to 
relax the penal laws against Roman Catholics, although so little pro- 
gress had the Peers yet made in the school of religious liberty, that, to 
please them, he said ‘‘ he was by no means prepared to carry toleration 
so far as Mr. Locke ;’—and while Roman Catholics were to be per- 
mitted to teach music and dancing, he introduced a clause to prohibit them 
from keeping boarding-schools, so that they might never have Protestant 
children under their management.* 
Soon after, a private affair of honour, wholly unconnected with any 
[Nov. 1780.] Parliamentary proceeding, was brought before the House 
by the Chancellor, as a breach of privilege. The Earl 
of Pomfret, sek supposing that a gamekeeper, whom he had 
discharged, had been countenanced by the Duke of Grafton, wrote some 
very intemperate letters to his Grace, and insisted on fighting him either 
with sword or pistol, Thurlow, on the rumour of what had happened, 
moved that they should attend, in their places, in the House; and both 
parties being heard, it was resolved that the behaviour of the Duke of 
Grafton had been highly laudable and meritorious; and Lord Pomfret 
being made to kneel at the bar, was informed that he had been guilty 
of *¢a high contempt of the House.” Afterwards the Lord Chancellor, 
with three-cocked hat on head, administered to him a thundering repri- 
mand.t Nowadays, I conceive the House would refuse to take cogni- 
zance of such a quarrel. The supposed breach of privilege would be 
the same if the challenger were a commoner, although this circumstance 
would render the interference more preposterous. 
In the beginning of the year 1781, Lord Thurlow spoke several 
times, and at great length, on the rupture which then took place with 
Holland. The question being one of public law upon the construction 
[a. p. 1782 of treaties, he strangely said that “ his pursuits and habits 
isa ‘ by no means fitted him for such an undertaking,—so 
that he could only treat the subject with the portion of common sense 
and experience Providence had endued him with, and familiarise it so 
as to bring it on a level with his own poor understanding.” Perhaps 
he maliciously insinuated, that to make himself intelligible to his audi- 
ence, it was necessary he should adapt his discourse to the meanest 
understandings.{ But the truth is, that he himself had read very little 


* 22 Parl. Hist. 759, 764. t+ Ib. 855, 866. 

t A remarkably acute friend of mine formerly at the bar, —the J udges having re- 
tired for a few minutes in the midst of his argument, in which, from their interrup- 
tions and objections, he did not seem likely to be successful,—went out of Court 
too, and on his return stated that he had been drinking a pot of porter. Being asked 
whether he was not afraid that this beverage might dull his intellect? “ ‘That is 


exactly my object,” said he—to bring me down, if possible, to the level of their 
Lordships.” 


LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 413 


of the law of nations; that he was very little acquainted with the rights 
of peace and war; and that his boasted superiority was in pretension, 
not in knowledge.* 

He succeeded better in justifying the military execution of Colonel 
Haynes, a British officer taken fighting for the Americans ;f and in 
crushing an attempt to censure Lord George Germaine’s elevation to 
the Peerage, by the title of Viscount Sackville.—when he first refused 
to put the question, and afterwards denounced as unjust the general 
orders issued by the late King against that officer after his court- 
martial. 

But Lord North’s administration was now in the agonies of dissolu- 
tion; and Thurlow began to coquet a little with the opposition.4 Lord 
Cornwallis had capitulated,—America was lost,—hostilities had com- 
menced with France, Spain, and Holland,—Gibraltar was besieged,— 
the fleets of the enemy insulted our shores,—lIreland was on the verge 
of rebellion,—Russia, and the northern powers, under pretence of an 
armed neutrality, were combined against our naval rights, and were 
respectively planning the seizure of a portion of our dominions,—and 
the utter overthrow of the British empire was anticipated. Notwith- 
standing the King’s firm adherence to the present system, a change of 
ministers was considered ‘inevitable, ‘The Whigs were becoming 
stronger in the House of Commons on every division; they had been 
lately strengthened by the accession of the brilliant talents of Pitt the 
younger, and of Sheridan; and, what was of even still greater impor- 
tance, the nation, though disposed to make a gallant struggle against 
the Continental States, which basely sought to take advantage of our 
misfortunes, was heartily sick of the colonial war, and was willing to 
acknowledge American independence. ‘Thurlow’s official career being 
supposed to be drawing rapidly to a close, the lawyers began to specu- 
late which Whig lawyer would be his successor, and how the surly 
Ex-chancellor would amuse and comfort himself in retirement? That 
he, who more zealously and uncompromisingly than any other member 
of the Tory government had supported all its most obnoxious acts, and 
more scornfully resisted all the popular measures of the opposition, 
should retain the Great Seal, never entered the imagi- M be 
nation of any human being except Thurlow himself L ARCH TPER:| 
and the King. Which of the two first conceived the bright thought 
must for ever remain unknown. When the ministerial vessel did go 


to pieces, Thurlow was the tabula in naufragio—the plank to which 
his Majesty eagerly clung. 


* 22 Parl. Hist. 1007-1078. t Ib. 976. t Ib. 1000, 1021. 


§ See his speeches on the Government Almanack Bill (22 Parl. Hist. 542), and 
on the Address of Thanks (Ib, 672.) 


414 REIGN OF GEORGE IIL 


CHAPTER CLVIHII. 


CONTINUATION OF THE LIFE OF LORD THURLOW TILL HE WAS DE- 
PRIVED OF THE GREAT SEAL ON THE FORMATION OF THE COALITION 
MINISTRY. 


I am more and more ata loss to account for Lord Rockingham, Lord 
5 7 Shelburne, and Mr. Fox agreeing to sit in the Cabinet 
Pea Myee tee Seen hake 
with the man who had so violently.denonnced their opi- 
nions on most important questions of foreign and domestic policy which 
were still pending. The great ‘ Coalition” between the two antagonist 
parties, which soon after so much shocked mankind, in reality did not 
involve any such incongruity as this adoption of the most odious mem- 
ber of the late government, without any renunciation of his principles. 
To do him justice, it should ever be remembered that, instead of saying 
“* Peccavt,” he continued to glory in all that he had hitherto done and 
said, while proclaiming the Rockinghams and the Shelburnes as ene- 
mies to their country. The proposed measures on which the new ad- 
ministration was founded, were four: 1. An offer to America of uncon- 
ditional independence as the basis of a negotiation for peace. 2. Eco- 
nomical reform as proposed in Mr, Burke’s bill. 3. Repression of the 
undue influence of the Crown in the House of Commons, by disqualify- 
ing contractors to sit there, and by preventing revenue officers from 
voting at parliamentary elections, 4. The pacification of Ireland by a 
renunciation of the authority of the British Parliament to legislate for 
that country. The subsequent fusion of Whigs and Tories was plausi- 
bly (I think not effectually) defended by the observation that, when it 
took place, all the questions on which Lord North and Mr. Fox had 
differed so widely were settled, and that there was nothing to prevent 
their practical co-operation for the future. But the four great measures 
which I have specified were still to be brought forward by the govern- 
ment, and Thurlow had often declared, and was still ready to declare, 
that they were all unconstitutional and pernicious, The King, upon a 
proper representation, could not have insisted (as he is said to have 
done) on the retention of Thurlow as the condition of his giving his 
consent to the introduction of Mr. Fox into the Cabinet; for although 
he might have executed his threat of abdicating, and retiring to Han- 
over, he could not at that hour have remained on the throne of Eng- 
land, indulging personal partialities and antipathies in the choice of 
his ministers. 
Mr. Adolphus, in his History of George III, says, ‘Mr. Fox, some 
time before the overthrow of the late cabinet, acknowledged that his 
adherents detested Lord Thurlow’s sentiments on the constitution; but 


LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 415 


added, they did not mean to proscribe him.”* Fox, however, was then 
speaking of the Lord Advocate of Scotland, not of Lord Thurlow; and 
he declared that ‘they would proscribe no man of any principles in the 
present dreadful moment, but the five or s1zz men who had been the con- 
fidential advisers of his Magesty in all the measures that had brought 
about the present calamities,” 

I can only account for the wishes of the King prevailing by suppos- 
ing the existence of jealousies, rivalries, and “bickerings among the 
Whigs themselves as to the disposal of the Great Seal. “It is certainly 
much to be deplored if the apprehensions of the Rockinghams, that the 
Shelburnes would be too much aggrandized by the appointment of Dun- 
ning, deprived him of the fair reward of his exertions, and the public of 
the benefit of his services. From the time that he accepted the Duchy 
of Lancaster and a Peerage, he sunk into insignificance. He had a 
seat in the cabinet, but that seldom gives much weight without import- 
ant official functions and a great department to administer. 

How Thurlow comported himself when he met his new colleagues at 
cabinets to concert their proceedings in Parliament, we are left to con- 
jecture. It must now have been very convenient for him to practise the 
habit he is said to have acquired of going to sleep, or pretending to go 
to sleep, after dinner, during discussions on which the safety of the state 
depended. We know that when the measures of Governthent were 
brought forward in Parliament, he opposed them without any reserve. 

During the short existence of the Rockingham administration, the 
Lord Chancellor might truly be considered the leader of * his Majesty’s 
opposition” in the House of Lords. He knew the secret, which the 
King was at no pains to conceal, and which was loudly proclaimed by 
all the ‘‘ King’s friends,” that the administration did not possess his Ma- 
jesty’s confidence.t His object, therefore, was to take every opportu- 
nity of disparaging it, and, above all, of sowing dissension between the 
different sections of the liberal party of which it was composed. 

They lost a little popularity by the defeat of the motion for a reform 
in the representation of the people in Parliament, made by their partisan, 
Mr. W. Pitt, then a young lawyer going the Western Circuit.. This 
measure was supported by the Shelburne Whigs, but discouraged by 
the Rockinghams, who, while they were economical reformers, professed 
great reluctance to touch the constitution of the House of Commons, 

To evince the sincerity of their professions while in opposition, and 
to recover their character, Ministers re-introduced, and both their sec- 
tions eagerly supported, the two bills which Thurlow had formerly 
thrown out in the Lords, for the disqualification of contractors as re- 


* Vol. iii. 349. 

t “ The King declared that, in the whole course of his reign, this was the only 
administration which had not possessed his confidence.”—Adolph, iii. 373, This 
statement is said to be from “ private information,” and his Majesty often praised 
the accuracy of this historian, The avowal is supposed to have been made by his 
Majesty after the administration was dissolved ; but from its formation, the fact had 
been notorious to all the world, 


416 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


presentatives, and of revenue officers as electors, The bills passed the 
Commons with acclamation, but when they came before the upper 
House, although the existence of the Government was declared to de- 
[May, 1782.] pend upon them, he attacked them with unabated vio- 
lence. The second reading of the ‘ Contractors’ Bill 
having taken place without discussion, the Lord Chancellor left the 
woolsack, and observed, that ‘he had expected that, before the bill 
reached that stage, some noble Lord would have had the goodness to 
explain to the House the principles on which it rested, and the neces- 
sity for introducing it at this particular juncture. The bill trenching on 
the ancient constitution of this realm, he considered it highly exception- 
able in itself; and it was still more exceptionable in its form, from the 
very singular, imperfect, careless, and inexplicable style and phrase 
in which it was worded. He would not, by applying strong epithets to 
the bill, give ita worse character than it really deserved ; but after hav- 
ing perused it with all the attention he was capable of, he could find no 
milder words in the English language to describe the impression his 
perusal of it had left upon his mind, than terming it an attempt to de- 
cevve and betray the people.””* 

Having denied that there ever had been any instances of Members of 
Parliament being corrupted by Ministers through the means of contracts, 
he asked if no such instance had ever occurred in the worst of times, 
why pay so bad a compliment to succeeding Ministers as to presume 
that they will be so much more depraved, so much more abandoned, so 
lost to all sense of shame, as to be guilty of what their predecessors 
would have shunned with abhorrence? Why have his Majesty’s pre- 
sent Ministers so little confidence in themselves? Why do they believe 
that they are more corrupt than those they have succeeded? [A noble 
Lord said, —‘* No Ministers could be more corrupt than the last.” ]— 
Lord Chancellor. ** Then, my Lords, I am relieved from farther arguing 
the question ; for if there was perfect purity in such matters (as I know 
there was) with the last Ministers, supposing them to have been cor- 
ruptly inclined (as I know they were not), the bill is confessedly unne- 
cessary, and it is a mischievous remedy for an imaginary and impossi- 
ble evil. It holds out nothing like a reform either in point of economy 
or influence. I must likewise, in the discharge of my duty, remind 
your Lordships that two years ago you rejected this very measure when 
it was proposed in a less exceptionable form. You are bound to act con- 


* This reminds me of a Westminster Hall anecdote of Mr. Clarke, leader of the 
Midland Circuit—a very worthy lawyer of the old school. His client long refusing 
to agree to refer to arbitration a cause which judge, jury, and counsel wished to get 
rid of, he at last said to him, ‘‘ You d—d infernal fool, if you do not immediately 
follow my Lord’s recommendation, I shall be obliged to use strong language to 
you.”’—Once, in a council of the benchers of Lincoln’s Inn, he very conscientiously 
opposed our calling a Jew to the bar. I tried to point out the hardship to be im- 
posed upon the young gentleman, who had been allowed to keep his terms, and 
whose prospects in life would thus be suddenly blasted. ‘“ Hardship!” said the 
zealous churchman—* no hardship at all! Let him become a Christian, and be 
d—d to him!!!” 


LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 417 


sistently. Ifyou should now, to please the Minister, suddenly wheel 
round, how are you to surmount the abusive attacks and scurrilous in- 
sinuations of anonymous libellers? Such illiberal assassins and scrib- 
bling garreteers may now have some colour for their attacks upon your 
dignity. It behoves your Lordships to act so that you may be able to 
laugh libellers to scorn, and to defy their malice.” He actually divided 
the House; but this was not yet the time to break up the administration, 
and he had on his side only 45 against 67 —a larger minority, how- 
ever, than had been ever mustered in the upper House against any mea- 
sure of Lord North’s government. 

Thurlow continued a most vexatious opposition to the bill in the com- 
mittee—where, going through it clause by clause, he denounced it as 
“a jumble of contradictions.” Jt was there defended by the two new 
law Lords, Lord Ashburton and Lord Grantley. They both gallantly 
fleshed their maiden swords in various rencounters with the “ blatant 
beast,” who tried to tread them down. 

On some of the divisions in the Committee the Ministerial majority 
was reduced to two votes. The bill was carried. But thenceforth 
the * King’s friends” in both Houses openly declared themselves against 
the existing government.* 

The Chancellor got up a similar opposition to the other government bill 
for disqualifying revenue officers from voting at Parliamentary elections, 
although Lord Rockingham, in what may be considered a dying speech, 
deprecated opposition to it, and stated the striking fact that there were 
no less than seventy boroughs in England in which the return of Mem- 
bers depended chiefly on revenue officers appointed and removable by 
the Government. On the last division on this Bill, the Chancellor had 
the mortification to announce that the Contents were 34, and the .Not- 
contents (of whom he was one) were 18. 

Notwithstanding that Mr. Burke and several other leading Members 
of the Government were hostile to a sweeping measure of Parliamentary 
reform, they concurred with their colleagues in the desire to punish 
corruption at elections, and the whole party in the House of Commons 
strongly supported the bill for transferring the franchise of Cricklade to 
the adjoining “‘ hundreds” on account of the universal bribery proved 
upon the burgesses. But when the bill came up to the Lords, it like- 
wise was vehemently opposed by the Chancellor. The Duke of Rich- 
mond thereupon charged the noble and learned Lord on the woolsack 
with ‘opposing indiscriminately every measure of regulation or im- 
provement which was laid before the House.” ‘The Lord Chancellor 
complained of the asperity with which he had been treated by the noble 
Duke, and said, “he thought it rather a peculiar hardship that his 
manaer—that of a plain man, who studied nothing but to convey his 
sentiments clearly and intelligibly—should be imputed to him as if 
arising from a habit of indiscriminate opposition or of intentional rude- 
ness,” 


* 22 Parl. Hist. 1356-1382. + 93 Parl. His t.95-101. 
VOL, V. 27 


418 REIGN OF GEORGE III 


Lords Mansfield, Camden, Loughborough, Ashburton, and Grantley, 
having taken part in the discussion, ‘‘ Lord Fortescue bewailed the de- 
graded dignity of the House, lowered and tarnished by a profusion of 
lawyers : it was no longer a house of peers, but a mere court of law, 
where all the solid honourable principles of truth and justice were 
shamefully sacrificed to the low pettifogging chicanery and quibbles of 
Westminster Hall. That once venerable and august assembly now 
resembled a meeting of attorneys in a Cornish court acting as barris- 
ters; the learned Lord on the woolsack seemed fraught with nothing 
but contradictions and law subtleties and distinctions, and all that.” 
The Chancellor was not to be deterred from his obstructive course by 
such observations; but notwithstanding all his efforts, the bill was 
carried.* 

Again, when a motion was made by the organ of the government in the 
House of Lords for an address of congratulation to the throne on the 
great victory obtained by Rodney over De Grasse in the West Indies, 
which was stated to be “‘ conducive to an honourable and advantageous 
peace,” Thurlow objected to these words, as containing @ political 
opinion on the expediency of peace ; and, for the sake of unanimity, 
they were omitted. 

The Marquis of Rockingham expired on the Ist of July. On the 
third of the same month stood an order of the day for the second read- 
ing of Mr. Burke’s famous bill to reform the Civil List Expenditure—a 
measure which was highly distasteful to the Court. No arrangement 
had yet been announced for the appointment of a new premier. ‘The 
Chancellor was eager to give a blow to that section of the administra- 
tion which was most hated by himself and his master—the personal 
adherents of the deceased minister. Therefore, at the. sitting of the 
House, in an abrupt manner, he left the woolsack to make a motion for 
the purpose of throwing out the bill. After calling their Lordships’ 
attention to its importance, he said, ‘At this late stage of the session, 
and with so thin an attendance, it would ill become you hastily to adopt 
a string of propositions, in themselves very complicated, and in many 
respects contradictory. But, my Lords, I am surprised to find that the 
Right Honourable Gentleman who prepared this bill, and who, some 
years ago, introduced one on somewhat similar principles, has now left 
out several important offices and places which he formerly represented 
as peculiarly standing in need of his speculative remedy. One of these 
offices is occupied by a noble Duke (Richmond) who cannot be anxious 
to receive its emoluments. He certainly would not suffer any corruption 
to be practised in any department in which he presides. Whether the 
ORDINANCE be left out in compliment to his Grace’s virtues and talents 
{ will not pretend to decide, but | am sure that the ‘ Ordinance’ and the 
‘Mint,’ and the ‘ Duchy of Lancaster,’ held by the Right Honourable 
Gentleman’s colleagues, are very properly left out, and [ could only 
wish that he had dealt in the same way with other offices which he has 


* 22 Parl. Hist. 1383-1395 ; Adolphus, iii. 363. + 23 Parl. Hist. 72. 


/ 


LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 419 


included,—some of them the most ancient and illustrious in the state,— 
so that to annihilate them was, in fact, an attempt to destroy the con- 
stitution.” He then started a technical objection, that there being for 
the protection of their privileges a standing order, passed in the year 
1702, which provided, that ‘‘no money bill should be allowed to pass 
containing extraneous enactments,” this bill granted a supply to his 
Majesty of 300,000/., and was a money bill, while it abolished or regu- 
lated half of the offices under the Crown. ‘ Therefore,” said he, ** with 
all my aversion to the evils which the bill seeks to remedy, | cannot 
give it my support. There appears to me to be objectionable and ab- 
surd matter almost in every clause of it, and I adjure your Lordships 
to adjourn the consideration of it—more especially, as if you agree, in 
compliance with the menaces of another branch of the legislature, to 
send it toa committee, you will sacrifice your standing order, and sur- 
render your dignity.” He concluded by moving that ‘the order for the 
second reading of the bill should be discharged. 

Lord Shelburne pretty clearly indicated his expectation (although 
Thurlow seems not yet to have been aware of the fact), that he was 
himself to be the minister, and he felt that, without an entire loss of 
public credit, he could not abandon the bill. He declared “that he 
joined with the House, and the whole public must join, in deploring the 
heavy loss the country had experienced in the death of the late Marquis 
of Rockingham. That great man, however, had by his example obliged 
whoever should be the minister to do his duty to the public, and had 
left this bill behind him as a pledge of his wisdom, his integrity, and 
his zeal, to further the strictest economy in every branch of the public 
expenditure.” The noble Earl then professed himself favourable to 
Parliamentary reform, and to all measures of improvement, but did not 
say a word in defence of the author of the bill—which might be the 
reason that Burke a few days after, when his Lordship had actually 
seized the helm, compared him to Catiline and to Borgia. Thurlow still 
called for a division on his motion against the bill, but was left in a mi- 
nority of nine to forty-four.* 

Lord Shelburne being declared first Lord of the Treasury, Mr. Fox, 
Lord Joho Cavendish, Mr. Burke, the Duke of Portland, and other 
Rockingham Whigs resigned, I cannot say that they made a dignified 
or becoming exit, In the explanations which followed, their leader said 
he had intended to withdraw before the death of the Marquis of Rock- 
ingham ; but all the world believed the true reason to be, that Lord 
Shelburne was appointed to succeed him. It had long been quite clear 
that Thurlow ought never to have been admitted into Lord Rocking- 
ham’s cabinet, and that Lord Rockingham ought to have adopted the 
course pursued by Mr. Pitt in 1792, by asking his Majesty to elect 
between his first Lord of the Treasury and his Chancellor. At.this 
crisis the retiring ministers should have objected to the retention of 
Thurlow—not to the promotion of Lord Shelburne. They presented 
to the nation the spectacle, ever disliked, of a squabble for places, and 
ap unfair attempt to control the discretion of the Sovereign. 


* 28 Parl. Hist. 139-147. 


420 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


Lord Shelburne was strengthened by the accession of young Pitt, 
who, for the office of Chancellor of the Exchequer, renounced the pro- 
fession of the law, the highest honours of which, had he continued in 
it, he must rapidly have attained. Thurlow joyously consented to con- 
tinue Chancellor, and the new administration being much less disagree- 
able to the Court than that of Lord Rockingham, he was much mollified, 
and gave it his support. Indeed, during Lord Shelburne’s ministry, 
which speedily came to a violent end by the “‘ Coalition,” the Chancellor 
is not recorded to have opposed one Government measure, and in the 
grand debate on the Preliminaries of Peace he gallantly supported his 
colleagues. 

On this occasion he followed Lord Loughborough, who, having be- 
come a Foxite, had in a long and elaborate speech attacked the terms 

of the treaty, and particularly, in reference to the 
[Fzs, 17, 1783. ] article BeLine to the cession or the Floridas, denied 
the power of the Crown, without an act of Parliament, to alienate a 
portion of the British empire, and to transfer the allegiance of British 
subjects to a foreign state. Thurlow’s answer is supposed to have 
settled that great constitutional question ; but | own it seems to me very 
unsatisfactory, for, as usual, he deals in sarcasm and 

[4.D.1783.] a .certion, not in reasoning or authorit d he d 
; g y, and he does not 
define or limit the power he contends for—so as to exclude from its 
exercise the cession of the Isle of Wight, or the garrison of Portsmouth. 
“¢ My Lords,” said he, ‘* 1 cannot claim your attention on the ground of 
eloquence and wit. ‘These belong peculiarly to the noble and learned 
Lord who has so long and ably endeavoured to fascinate your Lord- 
ships, and whose skill and address in managing the passions of his 
auditors are not to be equalled,—and by a man of plain meaning and 
sober understanding like myself, whose only wish is to discriminate 
between truth and fiction,—not to be coveted. The noble and learned 
Lord has thought proper to allege that the royal prerogative does not 
warrant the alienation in a treaty of peace of territories which were 
under the allegiance of the Crown of England. If this doctrine be 
true | must acknowledge myself strangely ignorant of the constitution 
of my country. ‘Till the present day of novelty and miracle, I never 
heard of such a doctrine. I apprehend, however, that the noble and 
learned Lord has thrown down the gauntlet on this occasion more from 
knight-errantry than patriotism, and that he was more inclined to show 
the House what powers of declamation he possesses in support of hypo- 
thetical propositions, than anxious gravely to examine a power wisely 
lodged in the Crown, the utility, much less the existence, of which has 
never hitherto been questioned. One would have thought that when a 
great, experienced, and justly eminent lawyer hazarded an opinion re- 
specting a most important point of the constitution of this country, he 
would deem it fit to produce proofs from our legal and historical records, 
or at least that he would attempt to show that the common opinion and 
consent of Englishmen went with him; but instead of this the noble 
and learned Lord resorts to the lucubrations and fancies of foreign 


LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 421 


writers, and gravely refers your Lordships to Swiss authors for an ex- 
planation of the prerogatives of the British Crown. For my own part, 
I at once reject the authority of all foreigners on such a_ subject. 
However full of ingenuity Mr. Vattel or Mr. Puffendorf may be on the 
law of nations, which cannot be fixed by any solid and permanent rule, 
I deny their authority, I explode their evidence, when they are brought 
in to explain to me what may or may not be done by the Sovereign | 
serve. Speaking from my own judgment, the records of Parliament, 
the annals of the country, I do not think the cession of the Floridas at 
all a questionable matter. Let the noble and learned Lord bring for- 
ward the subject regularly, and I will establish a doctrine clearly con- 
trary to the extraordinary notion now sported by him, or confess my 
ignorance, I will not combat the noble and learned Lord wtih vague 
declamation and oratorical flourishes,—these I contentedly leave to him 
with the plaudits they are calculated, perhaps intended, to gain,—but 
with undecorated sense and simple argument. In my opinion, it is safer 
to stick to the process by which we arrive at the conclusion that two 
and two make four, than to suffer your understandings to be warped by 
the fashionable logic which delights in words, and which strives rather 
to confound what is plain than to unravel what is intricate.”* He might 
just as well, after the manner of Lord Peter, in one sentence have 
affirmed with an oath that it was so, and uttered an imprecation on all 
who differed from him.t But this ebullition was thought by their Lord- 
ships a very ample answer to the objection, and even Lord Lough- 
borough’s friends felt that he had made a false point, and that he was 
completely put down. We must bear in mind Thurlow’s voice and 
manner, and that “‘ he looked wiser than any man ever was.”’t 

The ill-advised coalition had now actually taken place between Mr, 
Fox and Lord North, which produced a censure on 
the peace in the House of Commons and the resigna- Beebe 4 
tion of Lord Shelburne. 

Till very recently, it had been uniformly stated, and universally be- 
lieved, that in the formation of a new government the King still desired 
to have Thurlow Chancellor, and that his Lordship was nothing loth 
to comply with the royal wish, but that Mr. Fox and the Whigs, recol- 
lecting the part he had acted under Lord Rockingham, objected in the 
most peremptory manner to such an arrangement; that this dispute 
caused the delay which gave rise to the motions in the House of Com- 

* 23 Parl. Hist. 430. 

+ “ Look ye, gentlemen,” cries Peter in a rage; “ to convince you what a couple 
of blind, positive, ignorant, wilful puppies you are, I will use but this plain argu- 
ment : but, by G—, it is true, good, natural mutton as any in Leadenhall market ; 
and G— confound you both eternally if you offer to believe otherwise.” After this 
“thundering proof,” his Lordship was allowed to “ have a great deal of reason.” 

t Saying of Mr. Fox.—In the discussion of the Ashburton treaty, by which the 
Madawaska settlement, a part of Canada allowed to belong to England, was ceded 
to the United States, I tried to revive the question, ‘ Whether an act of Parliament 
was not necessary to give it validity ?” but I was told that the snfficiency of the 


prerogative to effect the transfer had been established by the unanswerable argu- 
ments of Thurlow. 


422 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


mons during the ‘interregnum ;” and that his Majesty was at last in- 
duced to yield to a compromise, by which the Great Seal was put into 
commission.* But in a late valuable biographical work it is stated, 
that “the following particulars were related by Lord Eldon to his 
brother-in-law, Mr. John Surtees: Mr. Fox, much to Lord Thurlow’s 
surprise, called at his house and was shown into his drawing-room, 
Lord Thurlow, immediately that Mr. Fox’s visit was announced, deter- 
mined to receive him (observing when he narrated the matter, that he 
did not wish Mr. Fox should suppose him afraid to meet any one), and 
an interview took place. Lord Thurlow, on being informed by Mr. 
Fox that he and his party wished the co-operation gf his Lordship as 
Chancellor in the administration they wished to form, said, Mr, Foz, 
no man can deny that either you or Mr. Pitt are beyond any two men 
that can be named fit from character and talents to be at the head of 
any administration ; but as Mr, Pitt is very acceptable to the King, 
and is in an extraordinary degree popular in the country, I have con- 
nected myself with him. On Lord Thurlow’s refusal, the Great Seal 
was put in commission.” Ido not impute the slightest intention wil- 
fully to misrepresent either to Mr. John Surtees or to Lord Eldon, but 
the story is wholly incredible, and there must have been a lapse of 
memory in one of them, or Thurlow must have intended to mystify. 
The refusal is more impossible than the offer, and the difficulty cannot 
be solved by an anticipation of a speedy change, for Thurlow would 
have considered that he might have an opportunity of accelerating this 
by entering the cabinet ; that acceptance must be agreeable to the King ; 
and that by betraying one prime minister was the best prelude to service 
under another. But to end the controversy, we have only to look to 
Mr. Fox’s declarations in the House of Commons at this very time re- 
specting him whom it was supposed he was pressing to become his 
[Marcu 24, 1783.] colleague. Mr. Coke of Norfolk, having moved 
an address, praying ‘that his Majesty would 

graciously take into his consideration the distressed state of the empire, 
and in compliance with the wishes of the House, would form an ad- 
ministration entitled to the confidence of the people,” Mr. Fox observed, 
‘“‘ If any wish to see who it is that for the last five weeks has governed 
the kingdom and ill advised his Majesty, let them go to the other House ; 
they will there find the great adviser in his true character. Let them 
mark the man; they will see difficulty, delay, sullenness, and all the 
distinguishing features of what has been falsely called az interregnum, 
but in reality been a specimen of the most open and undisguised rule 
ever known in this country.” Governor Johnstone took up the defence 
of the Chancellor, whom he described as “a great pillar of State, to 
whom the country might look up with confidence as a protector of its 
constitution against those mad projects of reform which threatened its 
annihilation ; therefore dark insinuations against such a character ought 
not to be listened to, If the noble and learned Lord acted in the man- 


* Sir F, Wraxall’s Mem. ii. 315. + Twiss’s Life of Eldon, i. 141. 


LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 423 


ner insinuated, and had been the cause of keeping the country so long 
without an administration, either by giving ill advice to his Majesty, or 
by any other means, he was a great criminal; but before withdrawing 
his friendship from one whom he had so long esteemed, he expected to 
have the fact proved, and he would not consent to presume its truth on 
mere surmise or assertion. If the right honourable gentleman, actuated 
by a sense of duty, was for a coalition, let him coalesce with the noble 
and learned Lord whom he once praised but now calumniated.” Jr. 
fox.— I have still as high personal respect for the noble and learned 
Lord alluded to as ever ; I have merely spoken of his public conduct, 
which I believe has been the source of great calamities to the country. 
I acknowledge his abilities, but | contend that they render their possessor 
an object to be dreaded, as he has in the same proportion the power of 
doing mischief.””* 

It is quite certain that Thurlow’s presence in Lord Rockingham’s 
cabinet was a principal reason for Fox’s resignation on the death of that 
nobleman ; that he found it utterly impossible to act with him; and 
that he would now indignantly have scorned the notion of again being 
associated with him. His reluctant assent, at a subsequent period during 
the King’s illness, to ratify the conditional disposition of the Great Seal 
in favour of Thurlow, only shows more strongly that he never would 
spontaneously have proposed such a course. 

The new ministry being formed under the nominal head-ship of the 
Duke of Portland, with Mr. Fox and Lord North 
as its efficient members, the Great Seal was taken [Arrin 2, 17838.] 
from Thurlow and put into commission, Lord Loughborough being the 
first Lord Commissioner.t 





CHAPTER CLIX. 


CONTINUATION OF THE LIFE OF LORD THURLOW TILL THE KING’S 
ILLNESS IN 1788. 


Bur Thurlow, deprived of the Great Seal, remained ‘ Keeper of the 
King’s conscience,” and they both went into hot opposition. If it be 
ever excusable in a King of England to cabal against his ministers, 
George III. may well be defended for the course he now [a. D. 1783.] 
took ; for they had been forced upon him by a factious ** * : 


* 23 Parl. Hist. 658-723, ' 

t “ 7th May, 1783.—Alexander Lord Loughborough, Chief Justice of the Com- 
mon Pleas, Sir Wm, Henry Ashurst, Knt., a Judge of the King’s Bench, Sir Beau- 
mont Hotham, a Baron of the Exchequer, being by letters patent, dated 9th April, 
1783, appointed Commissioners of the Great Seal of Great Britain, upon the 7th day 
of May following, being the first day of Easter Term, came into the Court of Chan- 
cery at Westminster Hall, and in open Court took the oaths, &c. ; the senior Master 
in Chancery holding the book, &c.”—Cr. Off. Min, No. 2, 30. 


424 REIGN OF GEORGE IIf. 


intrigue, and public opinion was decidedly in his favour. Thurlow was 
frequently closeted with him, and they watched for a favourable oppor- 
tunity to be revenged of the coalitionists. Mr. Pitt, on the resignation 
of Lord Shelburne, had declined an offer to form a new government, of 
which he was to be the head—wisely thinking it better to wait till the 
* coalition” should become more unpopular. For this reason he was 
for the present looked upon at Court rather coldly, and though polished 
and courteous in his manners, yet, on account of his lofty spirit and 
unbending independence, he never was personally so much beloved by 
George III. as Thurlow, who, rough and savage to the rest of man- 
kind, was always noted for pliancy and assentation in the presence of 
royalty. 

From April to December, the term of the coalition ministry, Thurlow 
was constantly considering the most effectual means for effecting its 
overthrow. Had he been in the cabinet, he would have had a still 
better opportunity of thwarting its measures, and his opposition would 
have had double weight. However, his prudence and sagacity were of 
essential service in tempering the impatience of the King, and when 
the proper time arrived he struck the fatal blow with signal vigour and 
dexterity. It was by secret advice more than by open efforts in Par- 
liament that he struggled for his restoration to office, and till Mr. Fox’s 
India Bill arrived in the House of Lords, that assembly was allowed to 
remain nearly in a passive state. 

The Ex-chancellor nevertheless availed himself unscrupulously of 

» + any little opportunity that occurred of disparaging 
Lerasin ld hos] the Loueanent and embarrassing its proceedings. 

On the second reading of the bill framed and introduced by the late 
Government for abolishing the right of appeal from the Irish Courts 
of law to the British House of Lords, and acknowledging the supremacy 
of the Parliament of Ireland, Lord Thurlow, to make his opponents 
unpopular in one island or the other, or in both,—instead of allowing 
it quietly to pass, according to the wish of prudent men, said,—‘ I 
desire to have a distinct statement of the grounds on which the measure 
is adopted by the present ministers. For what purpose is it to be car- 
ried? To what end is it to be applied? With what other measures is 
it to be followed up? There can be no embarrassment to ministers in 
answering such questions. The noble Duke [Portland] tell us he looks 
round for confidence, and claims it from the tenor of his past life. I 
am in great doubt, my Lords, respecting the meaning of this word 
‘confidence.’ Does it mean that his Grace has no other plan in view ? 
that his Cabinet have no plan for the Government of Ireland? and that 
they have taken this bill up without inquiry, without consideration, 
without caring whether it goes far enough or too far? Or does it 
mean that they have a fine system to develope, but that we must trust 
to their good character till the day arrives for making it known? Let 
me have the English of the word ‘ confidence.’ Unless it means ‘ ”o 
plan, no claim can be laid to it by this untried administration.” Lord 
Loughborough.— My Lords, I consider this conversation (for we have 


LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 425 


had no debate on the merits of the bill) extremely irregular if not dis- 
orderly. No objection being made to the bill, ministers are called upon 
to divulge their future system of policy, and to declare what may be 
their opinions and conduct on various matters not before the House. 
This is an opposition hardly consistent with fairness, and hardly such 
as any ministers could expect to encounter. The present ministers have 
been so short a time in place, that to require them already to proclaim 
all their plans, does seem very strange ; but above all is it strange, that 
they should be asked the grounds and objects of this bill. The persons 
who can best give that information are the ministers with whom it ori- 
ginated.” Lord Thurlow.—« 1 deny, my Lords, that I am disorderly 
in taking the present opportunity of desiring to know the principles on 
which the present bill is to be passed into a law. If it is adopted with- 
out principle, if it is taken up merely on the authority of the predecessors 
of the present ministers, then it may well be said to resemble a school- 
boy’s task, and the former ministers are to be considered as the ‘ prepo- 
sitors’ of the noble Lords opposite.—who are mere schoolboys, and 
ought not to hold the reins of government half an hour. But I have 
too much respect for their understanding, and too much regard for their 
reputation, to entertain such an opinion. They must have taken up 
this bill as part of a plan for the government of Ireland. If they will 
not give us the least intimation of it, let them at least tell us whether 
they have any plan at all.”’* 

During this short interval of opposition, Thurlow, to the surprise and 
amusement of the public, professed himself a ru- i ‘ 
FORMER ; and that he might cast odium upon the ee eee 
Government for throwing out an absurd bill, which professed to correct 
abuses in public offices, he warmly supported it. Said he, ‘I feel for 
the fair fame of the present administration, and as a well-wisher to the 
men of honour and honesty who belong to it, I advise them not to rest 
satisfied with the pledge of the noble Duke [Portland], that he will do 
what he can for economy. They are right not to mind the loss of mere 
popularity. He who rests on the empty clamour of a newspaper is an 
object only of contempt. But I advise the noble Duke to avoid the con- 
demnation of wise, temperate, and thinking men, who never judge rashly 
or hastily. All such men must cry out against the resolution to stifle 
such a bill as this without due investigation. The reform is loudly called 
for, and we must have it immediately. The nation will not be content 
with the noble Duke’s promise that he will begin the reform as soon as 
possible. The Legislature must interpose. It is not in the power of the 
best ministers to check abuses in their offices by their own authority. 
We may have ministers bankrupt in fortune and in name, and therefore 
the present bill is indispensable.” He actually divided the House upon 
it—but it was rejected by a majority of 40 to 24. 

He soon had a better battle-horse. On the 9th of December appeared 
at the bar of the House of Lords, attended by an im- [Dzc. 9, 1783.] 
mense number of coalition members of the House of 


* 23 Parl, Hist. 730-757. + 23 Parl. Hist, 1106-1114. 


426 REIGN OF GEORGE III 


Commons, Mr. Secretary Fox, and delivering a parchment roll to Lord 
Mansfield, as Speaker, said, ‘‘’ The Commons have passed a bill for the 
better government of the territorial possessions and dependencies of this 
kingdom in the East Indies, to which they pray the concurrénce of 
your Lordships.” The bill, as a matter of course, being read a first 
time,—on the motion “ that it be read a second time on Monday next,” 
Thurlow launched forth against it to a willing audience,—Lord Temple 
having very intelligibly conveyed the information to their Lordships that 
the bill was highly disagreeable to his Majesty, and that the rejection 
of it would enable his Majesty to get rid of ministers whom his Majesty 
so much disliked. Lord Thurlow.—‘ There is much indecency in pro- 
posing so early a day for the consideration of such an important 
measure—a measure perhaps the most important which was ever agi- 
tated in Parliament. In the first place, it is a most atrocious violation 
of private property. If it be necessary, the necessity must be fully and 
fairly proved by evidence brought to your bar; not by the report of a 
Committee of the other House, to which I would give as much faith as 
to the adventures of Robinson Crusoe. Whatever necessity for inter- 
ference may be proved, still I contend that the present bill neither goes 
to the correction of any existing abuse, to the prevention of any evil in 
future, nor to the relief of the Company’s pressing wants. In fact, my 
Lords, it is a most direct and daring attack upon the constitution of this 
country, and a subversion of the first principles of government.” 

Lord Loughborough tried to defend the bill by reason of the insol- 
vent state of the Company’s affairs at home, and the deplorable state of 
their settlements abroad: ‘* What scenes of desolation and distress do we 
behold? A prince has been driven from his palace,—his treasures have 
been seized, and he is now a fugitive wandering among the jungles of 
the Ganges. Fertile provinces have been laid waste—wars have been 
entered into without provocation and without advantage—and a peace 
with the Mahrattas will only lead to a fresh war with Tippoo Saib. A 
country so misgoverned must be wrested from the hands of its SP 
weak or wicked rulers.” 

Lord Thurlow.—* The noble and learned Lord has not yet fiche 
safed to give any solution to my difficulties. I ask the noble and learned 
Lord whether he can reconcile the principles of this bill to the principles 
of the British constitution, even supposing the necessity for the interfe- 
rence of Parliament to be apparent? The noble and learned Lord pre- 
siding in two of our Supreme Courts, I might have expected to find him 
the champion of British justice.* It is not fitting that such a character 
should meddle in the dirty pool of politics. The present bill means evi- 
dently to create a power which is unknown to the constitution—an im- 
perium in imperio,—but as I abhor tyranny in all its shapes, I shall 
strenuously oppose this most monstrous attempt to set up a power in the 
kingdom which may be used in opposition to the Crown, and to destroy 


* Lord Loughborough was at this time Chief Justice of the Common Pleas and 
First Commissioner of the Great Seal. 


LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 427 


the liberties of the people. I wish to see the Crown great and respect- 
able; but if the present bill should pass, it will be no longer worthy of 
a man of honour to wear, The King, by giving the royal assent to it, 
will, in fact, take the’Crown from his own head, and place it on the 
head of Mr. Fox.”* 

From the manner in which these observations were received by the 
House, it was clear that the victory was won, ‘The only consideration 
was as to the manner in which the bill should be rejected. Without any 
division, an order was made for hearing counsel and evidence at the bar 
in support of the Petition of the East India Company against the bill, 
and Thurlow, notwithstanding the vigorous efforts of Lord Loughbo- 
rough, being supported by Lord Mansfield and Lord Camden, was able 
to dictate the mode in which the examinations should be conducted, — 
so that the final catastrophe was evidently at hand. In the debate on 
the second reading, Thurlow would not vouchsafe even to deal out any 
more vituperation or denunciation. He contented himself with calling 
out, “* Question! question! Divide! divide!” The bill was rejected by 
a majority of 95 to 76. 

Next night, at twelve o’clock, a messenger delivered to the two Sec- 
retaries of State, Mr. Fox and Lord North, his Ma- 
jesty’s orders “that they should surrender up the LAP Rok aati 
seals of their offices by their under-secretaries, as a personal interview 
on the occasion would be disagreeable to him.” The seals were imme- 
diately given to Earl Temple, who, as Secretary of State, sent letters of 
dismission the day following to the rest of the Cabinet Council. At the 
same time Mr. William Pitt, at the age of twenty-four, was declared 
Prime Minister, and the government was formed, which many predicted 
could not last more than a few weeks, but which proved the strongest 
and the most durable of any during the long reign of George III. 

Thurlow was, of course, to be restored to his office of Lord Chancel- 
lor, and he promised very cordially to support the new chief, though 
laughing at him in private on account of his zeal for reform, and his 
professions of public virtue. We shall see that, from their very dif- 
ferent characters and principles, their mutual jealousies and dislikes 
were ere long manifested to all the world. 

Thurlow’s conduct during the Coalition Ministry, though geherally 
blamed with much severity, appears to me the most unexceptionable 
part of his whole career. He is censured for giving secret advice to 
the Sovereign when he was not in office; but we must not carry our 
constitutional notions to a pedantic length. I think George III. was 
fully justified in wishing to get rid of Mr, Fox and Lord North as soon 
as possible ; and I cannot condemn an experienced statesman, who was 
in opposition, for giving him hints as to the most expedient course to be 
pursued for gaining that object. Even if he repeated Lord 'Temple’s 
declaration, that “ his Majesty disliked the India Bill,” I do not see that 
he‘was guilty of any very heinous offence. The name of the Sovereign 


* 24 Parl. Hist. 122. + 24 Parl. Hist. 226. 


428 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


cannot be regularly mentioned in Parliament to influence debate, but it 
is absurd to suppose that he can never have any wish except that of his 
ministers for the time being, and that he alone, of all persons in his do- 
minions, is to be without any private opinion. Although his private 
opinion on a public measure is not binding, either in or out of Parlia- 
ment, there are rare occasions where it may not improperly be made 
known, and George III. may deserve some credit for then acting as the 
Coryphzus of his subjects. No one in the present age believes that 
the framers of this famous India Bill had the intention imputed to them 
of erecting a power independent of the Crown, but its policy was doubt- 
ful. The joint sway of the Court of Directors and the Board of Con- 
trol being substituted for the arbitrary rule of the “ Seven Kings,” our 
Eastern empire has been governed with wisdom, with success, and with 
lory. 

The Lords Commissioners having some business to wind up in the 
Court of Chancery, the transfer of the Great Seal did not take place till 
the 23d of December. On that day they surrendered it at a council 
held at the Queen’s House, and it was restored to Thurlow with the 
title of Lord Chancellor.* 

It must have been amusing, during the ceremony, to observe the 
countenances of the two principal performers, who having been friendly 
associates had become bitter rivals—who had been years violently 
struggling, and who for years continued violently to struggle, for the 
same bauble. But how little could they penetrate into futurity! The 
wary Wedderburn thus obliged to part with the object of his affections, 
afterwards met with a cruel disappointment, when, on the King’s ill- 
nesss, he thought it was within his clutch, and the reckless ‘Thurlow at 
that time willing to sacrifice his benefactor and his party that he might 
retain it,—subsequently securely in possession of it,—in consequence 
of his own waywardness and intemperance saw it transferred to his 
opponent,—who now despondingly believed that his chance of reaching 
the summit of his ambition was gone for ever. 

During the storms which raged in the House of Commons for the 
remainder of the session, there was a perfect calm in the House of 
Lords. Here the new ministry had from the beginning a complete 
ascendency, while in the House of Commons there were great, though 
decreasing majorities against them, led on by Mr. Fox and Lord North. 

It was only thought necessary once to bring the Peers into action. 
The Commons having passed certain resolutions which it was con- 
tended amounted to a repeal of an Act of Parliament, and to a denial 


* « 23d Dec. 1783. 'The Lords Commissioners for the custody of the Great Seal 
of Great Britain having delivered the said Great Seal to the King at the Queen’s 
House on Wednesday, the 23d of Dec. 1783, his Majesty the same day delivered it 
to Edward Lord Thurlow, with the title of Lord High Chancellor of Great Britain, 
&c.” The entry goes on in the usual form to state his sitting in Lincoln’s Inn 
Hall next day, and his taking the oaths in Westminster Hall the first day of the 
following Hilary Term, the Master of the Rolls holding the book, &e.—Cr. Of. 
Min, No. 2, p. 32. 


LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 429 


of the King’s right to choose his own ministers, Lord [Fen. 4, 1784 
Effingham brought forward counter resolutions in the ad ‘J 
House of Lords, denying the right of one branch of the legislature to 
suspend the execution of the laws, and affirming the King’s prerogative 
in the appointment of his ministers. ‘These were opposed by Lord 
Loughborough, who insisted that the resolutions of the Commons were 
constitutional, as that House had‘a control over the supplies, and a right 
to advise the Crown upon the exercise of the prerogative. He said, 
‘there is a maxim that ‘the King can do no wrong;’ but the law ad- 
mits the possibility of the King being deceived, and there is no doubt 
that princes are more likely to be imposed upon than other men. Ac- 
cording to this principle the Commons, even before the Revolution, 
were in the habit, as often as they deemed it expedient, to address the 
King, humbly praying him to change his councils and his councillors. 
I doubt not the abilities of many of the present administration—for 
some of whom [ have the greatest esteem. Yet I think it very ill-ad- 
vised that they should remain in office after the majorities which have 
appeared against them, and in not seeing the perilous consequences of 
a breach between the two Houses of Parliament which they are now 
precipitating. An attempt is made to establish an executive power in- 
dependent of Parliament, and to create a precedent which may be fatal 
to the dignity and to the authority of both Houses.”—The Lord Chan- 
cellor leaving the woolsack, reprobated the resolutions lately come to 
by the Commons as “ the wild efforts of childish ambition :” ‘Is their 
discretion,” continued he, ‘‘to be substituted for law? I know how 
irksome it is to be obliged, from conscience and a love of justice, to 
oppose the desires of such a powerful body ; this is not reposing on a 
bed of roses; but if I had been placed in the situation of the present 
Lords of the Treasury when served with the illegal mandate, I trust I 
should have had firmness to spurn at it with contempt and disdain.” 
He warmly eulogised Mr. Pitt, and particularly dwelt on his disinte- 
restedness in recently refusing the lucrative sinecure of the Clerk of the 
Pells, which, said he, “I was shabby enough to advise him to accept, 
and certainly should, under his circumstances, have been shabby enough 
myself to have accepted.” He recommended the resolutions now moved 
as ‘¢a corrective of the wildness of that mad ambition, which by talking 
in a nonsensical tone of the dignity and honour of Parliament, persuaded 
men, of whom better things might be expected, to adopt measures ex- 
travagant, absurd, and mischievous,””* 

The tide of popular favour running stronger and stronger against the 
coalitionists, although Mr. Pitt continued in a ; 
minority in the House of Commons, and an ad- LMA Re ut ina 
dress had been carried there praying for a change of ministers,—it was 
determined to dissolve Parliament, and to appeal to the people. While 
preparations were making to carry this measure into effect, the metro- 
polis was thrown into consternation by the news that the Great Seal 


* 24 Parl, Hist, 513. 


430 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


was stolen from the custody of the Lord Chancellor, and many who 
attached a superstitious reverence to this bauble, imagined that for want 
of it all the functions of the executive government must be suspended. 
A charge was brought against the Whigs that, to prevent the threatened 
dissolution, they had burglariously broken into the Lord Chancellor’s 
house in the night time, and feloniously stolen and carried off the 
Cuavis Rrent. 

The truth was, that very early in the morning of the 24th of March, 
some thieves did break into Lord Thurlow’s house in Great Ormond 
Street, which then bordered on the country. Coming from the fields, 
they had jumped over his garden wall, and forcing two bars from the 
kitchen window, went upa stair toa room adjoining the study. Here they 
found the Great Seal inclosed in the two bags so often described in the 
close roll, one of leather—the other of silk,—two silver-hilted swords 
belonging to the Chancellor’s officers,—and a small sum of money. 
With the whole of this booty they absconded. ‘They effected their 
escape without having been heard by any of the family; and though a 
reward was offered for their discovery, they never could be traced. It 
will hardly be believed that Lord Loughborough, under whose legal 
advice the Whig party at this period acted, was so bad a lawyer as to 
recommend this burglary as a manceuvre to embarrass the Government, 
although King James II. had thought that he had effectually defeated 
the enterprise of the Prince of Orange by throwing the Great Seal into 
the river Thames. 

When the Chancellor awoke and found what had happened, he im- 
mediately went to Mr, Pitt in Downing Street, and the two waited upon 
his Majesty at Buckingham House to communicate the intelligence to 
him. <A council was immediately called, at which the following order 
was made :— 

“¢ At the Court at St. James’s, the 24th of March, 1784, present, the 
King’s most Excellent Majesty in Council,—Whereas in the course of 
the last night the house of the Right Honourable the Lord High Chan- 
cellor of Great Britain was broke open, and the Great Seal of Great 
Britain stolen from thence; it is this day ordered by his Majesty in 
Council, that his chief engraver of seals do immediately prepare a Great 
Seal of Great Britain with the following alterations:— 

‘‘'That on the side where his Majesty is represented on horseback, 
the number of the present year be inserted in figures 1784 on the plain 
surface of the seal behind his Majesty; and the herbage under the 
horses’ hind legs omitted. 

«That on the reverse, where his Majesty is sitting in state, the palm- 
branch and the cornucopia be omitted on the sides of the arms at the 
top; and over the above arms the number of the present year 1784 
in figures to be inserted, and at the bottom also the present year 
MDCCLXXXIIIL. in Roman figures, 

‘And that he do present the same to his Majesty at this board to- 
morrow for his royal approbation. And the Right Honourable Lord 

‘Sidney, one of his Majesty’s principal Secretaries of State, is to cause 


LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 431 


a warrant to be prepared for his royal signature to the said engraver 
upon this occasion.” 

Such expedition was used, that by noon the following day, the new 
Great Seal was finished, and the following order was made :— 

** At the Court at the Queen’s House, the 25th of March, 1784, pre- 
sent, the King’s most Excellent Majesty in Council,— A new Great 
Seal of Great Britain having been prepared by his Majesty’s chief en- 
graver of seals in pursuance of a warrant to him for that purpose 
under his royal signature, and the same having been this day presented 
to his Majesty in Council and approved, his Majesty was thereupon gra- 
ciously pleased to deliver the said new Seal to the Right Honourable 
Edward Lord Thurlow, Lord High Chancellor of Great Britain, and to 
direct that the same shall be made use of for sealing all things whatso- 
ever which pass the Great Seal.’””* 

From the Council at St. James’s, His Majesty immediately proceeded 
to the House of Lords, and the Commons being summoned (the Lord 
Chancellor standing on his right hand, holding the new Great Seal in 
the old purse), thus pronounced the doom of the Coalitionists :— 

“My Lords and Gentlemen, on a full consideration of the present 
situation of affairs and of the extraordinary circumstances which have 
produced it, I am induced to put an end to this session of Parliament ; 
and I feel it a duty which I owe to the constitution and to the country 
in such a situation, to recur as speedily as possible to the sense of my 
people by calling a new Parliament.” 

In allusion to this theft of the Great Seal, the Rolliad, after describing 
the different classes of nobility in the House of Lords, — in the follow- 
ing lines “ proceeds to take notice of the admirable person who so 
worthily presided in that august assembly :”— 


“The rugged Thurlow, who, with sullen scowl, 
In surly mood, at friend and foe will growl ; 





* For some reason, of which there is no account or tradition in the Couneil 
Office, the Great Seal was again changed, as appears from the following entries, ex- 
tracted from the books of the Privy Council : 

* At the Court at St. James’s the 2d of April, 1784, present the King’s most Ex- 
cellent Majesty in Council,—It is this day ordered by his Majesty in Council that 
his Majesty’s chief engraver of seals do forthwith prepare the draft of a new Great 
Seal of Great Britain, and present the same to his Majesty at this board for his 
royal approbation.” 

“ At the Court at St. James’s the 14th of May, 1784, present, the King’s most 
excellent Majesty in Council,—His Majesty in Council having been this day pleased 
to approve the draught of a new Great Seal of Great Britain, doth hereby order that 
his chief engraver of seals do forthwith engrave the said Seal according to the said 
draught, and lay the same before his Majesty at this board for his royal approba- 
tion; and that the Rt. Hon, Lord Sidney, one of his Majesty’s principal Secretaries 
of State, do cause a warrant to be prepared for his Majesty’s royal signature to the 
said engraver upon this occasion.” 

“ At the Court at St. James’s the 15th of April, 1785, present, the King’s 
most Excellent Majesty in Council,—This day the old Great Seal being delivered 
up to his Majesty by the Right Hon. Edward Lord Thurlow, Lord High Chancel- 
lor of Great Britain, the same was defaced in his Majesty’s presence ; and his 
Majesty was thereupon pleased to deliver to his Lordship a new Great Seal.” 


432 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


Of proud prerogative the stern support, 

Defends the entrance of great George’s Court 
’Gainst factious Whigs, lest they who stole the Seal 
The sacred diadem itself should steal : 

So have I seen near village butcher’s stall 

(If things so great may be compar’d with small) 
A mastiff guarding on a market-day 

With snarling vigilance his master’s tray.”’* 


When the appeal to the people was made, the Coalitionists were swept 

2, 7 away like chaff before the wind, and a House of 

Lari et di Add Gautafens was returned, ready to do whatever Mr. 

Pitt should desire them, except to reform the abuses in the representa- 

tion of the people, —a measure which he still urged earnestly and I 
believe sincerely. 

From the meeting of the new Parliament till the question of the Re- 
[May 18, 1784.] gency arose, Thurlow enjoyed perfect ease, tranquil- 

ity, and security. No administration in England 
ever was in such a triumphant position as that of Mr, Pitt, when after 
the opposition it had encountered, the nation applauding the choice of 
the Crown, declared in its favour, and the Coalition leaders, with their 
immense talents, family interest, and former popularity, found difficulty 
to obtain seats in the House of Commons. 

While Mr. Fox, Mr. Burke, and Mr. Sheridan kept up some smart 
debates in the House of Commons upon the Westminster scrutiny and 
other subjects, the House of Lords usually only met to adjourn.t How- 
ever, there was a little show of resistance there to Mr. Pitt’s India Bill, 
Lord Stormont objecting to its proceeding in the absence of the law 
Lords; but the Lord Chancellor caused much merriment by showing 
‘that of the six there was only one absent from being entangled in the 
discharge of professional duty ;” and the general opinion was, that the 
opportunity should not be lost of getting quietly on with the second read- 
ing. ‘There was only one division on the bill—when (to prove the little 
interest which the subject now excited) the numbers were 11 to 4. 
The Chancellor likewise condescended to defend against a sharp attack 
of Lord Loughborough Mr, Pitt’s famous bill for commuting the tax on 
tea,) for one on windows, — ably demonstrating the advantages of low 
duties and free trade.|| However, before the conclusion of this session, 
he showed symptoms of that waywardness of temper or rather dislike 
of Mr. Pitt, which broke out from time to time, and at last caused his 
removal from office. 


* Many other jeux d’esprit were made upon the occasion, some of which I have 
heard from men who are now grave Judges and dignitaries in the church, but may 
not set down. The most popular was a supposed dialogue between the Chancellor 
and a lady of his family. 

t+ Now was uttered the sarcasm on their Lordships, which may still be repeated. 
—Scene below the Bar. 1st Mob. “How sleepy the Lords are!”—2d Mob. “No 
wonder ; they rise so early.” 

} 24 Parl. Hist. 1290-1310. 

§ “ While Billy, list’ning to their tuneful plea, 

In silence sipp’d his Commutation Tea.”—Rolliad. 

|| 24 Parl, Hist. 1374. 


LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 4383 


Mr, Dundas, as the organ of the Government, had brought in a bill, 
which Mr, Pitt supported in an able speech, and which [Ave. 16, 1784.] 
passed the Commons without the slightest opposition, 
for restoring the estates in Scotland, which had been forfeited in the 
rebellion of 1745, to the heirs of the former owners who had been at- 
tainted. But when it stood in the orders of the day for a second read- 
ing in the House of Lords, the Lord Chancellor left the woolsack, and, 
instead of opening it, as was expected, and moving that it be read a 
second time, to the great amazement of all his hearers, spoke as fol- 
lows: ‘My Lords, [ desire to know what there isto render it neces- 
sary that a bill of such magnitude should pass so suddenly at the very 
close of the session? I speak of this bill as a private man, for I know 
nothing of it as a minister. I do lament that I never heard of it till it 
had been read a first time in the other House, Since then, considering 
my various avocations, noble Lords will easily believe that | have not 
had time to consider it with sufficient attention. [I must confess, my 
Lords, I think it would have been more regular if the bill had originated 
in this House, or with the King himself. In that case [ might have been 
favoured with some prior intimation of the grounds on which, it seems, 
his Majesty has been advised to relax the severity of the laws against 
treason, framed for the public tranquillity. Bills of remission and lenity 
have almost invariably been introduced by a message from the Crown 
to this House. J will not attempt to argue at length against the bill, for 
all arguments would be vain if the Government be resolved to carry it.” 
He contended, however, that ‘‘ by a settled maxim of the British consti- 
tuition, nothing was an adequate punishment for treason, a crime lead- 
ing to the subversion of government, but the total eradication of the 
traitor, his name, and family, from the society he had injured. Feczé 
hec sapientia quondam, This was the wisdom of former times. This 
was the rule of conduct laid down and invariably acted upon. But if a 
more enlightened age thinks otherwise, I hope equal liberality is to be 
shown to the heirs of those attainted in former rebellions.” He like- 
wise objected strongly to a clause in the bill, for applying part of the 
accumulated fund arising from the rents of these estates to the comple- 
tion of the Forth and Clyde Canal, which he denounced as a job, and 
thus concluded: ‘I am far from imputing any improper motive to those 
from whom the measure comes. J know them well, and know their 
honour to be equal to their great abilities; but it is incumbent on me, 
sitting on the woolsack, to look with an unbiassed mind to every mea- 
sure that comes before the House, from whatever quarter, and scrupu- 
lously to form my judgment upon it, according to the principles of jus- 
tice and equity. Possibly I may stand single in my sentiments respect- 
ing this bill; but I think it my duty to deliver them.” He did not ven- 
ture to divide ; or very likely the Lord Chancellor would have been in 
the novel situation of having no one to appoint teller on his own side. 
The bill passed without further opposition.* The probability is, that 


* 24 Parl. Hist. 1363-1373, 
VOL. V. 28 


434 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


the supposed affront arose from the measure being thought so unobjec- 
tionable, that the Chancellor, to save the trouble, was not consulted 
about it, — or it might have been discussed at a cabinet when he was 
asleep. His belief that the King was so devotedly attached to him, 
made him careless about pleasing or displeasing the minister, and 
encouraged him to take liberties with the House, and with all public 
men.* 

In the session of 1785, notwithstandiag his former opposition to the 
same policy, Thurlow now strenuously supported the propositions for a 
commercial union with Ireland, which do so much honour to the me- 
mory of Mr. Pitt, and not only show that he was disposed to govern 
that country with justice and liberality, but that being the first disciple 
of Adam Smith who had been in power, he thoroughly understood, and 
was resolved to carry into effect, the principles of free trade. The 
Chancellor treated with infinite contempt the witnesses who appeared at 
the bar to prove the ruin which would overtake the manufactures of 
England if the manufactures of Ireland, where labour was so cheap, 
might come into competition with them. He spared Peel, the head of 
the cotton-spinners, but he said, that ‘‘ while the great Wedgwood was 
a distinguished potter, he was a very bad politician.” t 

When Parliament met, in the beginning of 1786, notwithstanding 
the general tranquillity and the returning prosperity of the nation, an 
[Jan. 24, 1786.] attack was made, by Lord Loughborough, upon MMi 

nisters, respecting their Irish and their Indian policy, 
but Lord Thurlow defended both very vigorously, and the address was 
carried without a division. The opposition Lords do not seem to 
have offered any resistance to the measures of Government during the 
remainder of the session. ‘The impeachment of Mr. Hastings was the 
only subject which now interested the public mind, and this calling 
forth unexampled displays of eloquence from Burke and Sheridan, had 
not yet reached the Upper House. _ 

The session of 1787, though still without any ministerial crisis, was 

not quite so sluggish. The French commercial 
BBS te arm AO treaty concluded with M. de Vergennes, founded 
on the best principles of international policy, and calculated to draw 
together, by mutual benefits, two nations between whom, from prohi- 
bitory duties and rankling jealousies, there had for centuries only been 


* We may know what his opponents at this time thought might be plausibly im- 
puted to him from the jew d’esprit in the “ Rolliad,” entitled “The Poxirican ReE- 
crIrT Boox for the year 1784.” 


* How to make a Chancellor. 


“ Take a man of great abilities, with a heart as black as his countenance. Let 
him possess a rough inflexibility, without the least tincture of generosity or affection, 
and be as manly as oaths and ill manners can make him. He should be a man who 
will act politically with all parties,—hating and deriding every one of the individu- 
als who compose them.”—Aolliad, 22d ed, p. 430. 

+ 25 Parl. Hist. 820-885. 

t 25 Parl. Hist. 995. This debate is memorable for being the first in which a 
legislative Union with Ireland was ever publicly proposed. 


LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 435 


a succession of wars and truces, being factiously attacked by Lord 
Loughborough and other opposition Peers, was violently defended by 
the Lord Chancellor, He, as usual, abstained from any expenditure of 
argument, of which, whether in judging or debating, he was ever penu- 
rious ; but he asserted and adjudged, that the treaty was an excellent 
treaty, and he pronounced all the objections to it to be frivolous and 
vexatious. He gained a considerable, but undeserved triumph over 
Lord Shelburne (now become Marquis of Lansdowne), who had the 
temerity to interrupt him. Commenting on certain observations re- 
specting the ‘“ Family Compact,” between France and Spain, and the 
erection of new fortifications at Cherbourg, Thurlow said, “1 maintain, 
my Lords, that the Family Compact is a treaty which no nation on 
earth has a right to tell France or Spain they may not make. If 
Spaniards in France are to be treated as Frenchmen, and Frenchmen 
in Spain are to be treated as Spaniards, and there is an alliance offen- 
sive and defensive between them, why should we murmur? We are 
told that a remonstrance should be made against the fortifications now 
carrying on at Cherbourg. Where is the Minister who would venture 
to make such a remonstrance? [Maryuzs of Lansdowne. ‘1 would.’] 
By what part of the law of nations have we a right to remonstrate ? 
[Marquis of Lansdowne. *.We have no right."]_ ‘Then the noble Mar- 
quis would do what he confesses he has no right to do; so that he and 
‘his application would be laughed at, as absurd and ridiculous.”* 

The House, however, soon after, for once rebelled against their 
tyrant. The Duke of Queensberry and the Earl of Abercorn, while 
two of the sixteen representative Peers of Scotland, being created 
British Peers, Lord Stormont moved a resolution, which he founded on 
a just construction of the Articles of Union, that they ceased to sit as 
representatives of the Scotch peerage, and Dr. Watson, Bishop of 
Landaff, ably supported the motion.—Lord Chancellor. ‘Your Lord- 
ships are not to listen to supposed or real convenience,—to this or that 
set of men,—nor to consider what an act of Parliament ought to be, but 
what it is. Here you have the Treaty of Union which contains no such 
disqualification ; and [ say you are bound to abide by the letter of it. 1 
must take the liberty of reprehending the noble Viscount for using the 
arguments with which he introduced his motion, and the Right Reve- 
rend Prelate would have done well to have read the Articles of the Union 
before he ventured to let loose his opinions on the subject. I insist 
upon it, my Lords, that giving an English title to a Scotch Peer cannot 
take away or diminish any one function previously belonging to him, 
and that he is as fully capacitated to be a representative Peer of Scot- 
land as before.” Nevertheless, Lord Loughborough, taking the opposite 
side, and making out a strong case, as well by the words of the statute 


* 26 Parl. Hist. 586. We could not have remonstrated on this occasion as we 
formerly did about the fortifications of Dunkirk,—which, by treaty, were to be de- 
molished; but all warlike preparations may be made the subject of representation 
and remonstrance,—although the law of nations does not forbid a state to arm all 
its citizens, and to make all its territory one garrison. 


436 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


as by precedent, the motion, to the great mortification of the Chancellor, 
and the general surprise of the bystanders, was carried by a majority 
of 52 to 38.* 

The Chancellor soon recovered his ascendency, and, acting on his 
usual illiberal principles, threw out ‘a Bill for the Relief of Insolvent 
Debtors,” which, till he spoke, was in great favour with the House. It 
had been read a second time without opposition; but on the motion for 
going into a committee upon it, Lord ‘Thurlow, denying that he was so 
malignant an enemy to the happiness of mankind as to feel a satisfac- 
tion in the distress of any portion of his fellow-creatures, pointed out 
what he called the manifest injustice of breaking in upon that power of 
“‘ coercion of payment” with which the law had armed the creditor. for 
the security of his property. ‘If there is to be,” said he, “‘ such a 
thing as imprisonment for debt, it ought to continue unchecked and 
unrestrained, unless in cases of flagrant oppression and unnecessary 
cruelty. The general idea, that humanity requires the intervention of 
the legislature between the debtor and the creditor, is a false notion— 
founded in error and dangerous in practice. A much greater evil than 
the loss of liberty is the dissipation and corruption that prevail in our 
prisons ; to these your Lordships had better direct vour attention, than 

to defrauding the creditor of the chance of recovering his property by 
‘letting loose his debtor, and taking from him the very hope of pay- 
ment.” So blinded was he by prejudice as not to see that the ‘ disst- 
pation and corruption” of which he complains were produced by the 
very power of imprisoning which he defended. It is important that 
such distorted sentiments should be recorded for the use of those who 
are to write the history of human errors. How delightful to think that, 
imprisonment for debt being abolished, the site of the Fleet prison, the 
scene of misery and vice, the description of which, in the pages of 
Fielding and Smollett, harrows up our souls, is now to be converted 
into a centre railway station for the metropolis,—so that those who are 
henceforth to congregate there, instead of being immured for life in 
darkness and filth, “and forced to resort to ebriety as a temporary relief 
from despair, may in a few hours be conveyed, for the purposes of useful 
industry or of innocent recreation, through pure air and over verdant 
fields, to the remotest extremities of the kingdom ! While the perfecti- 
bility of our nature must be acknowledged to be a delusion contrary 
alike to religion and philosophy, the vast improvements which have 
been made in our social system should stimulate and encourage our 
efforts to diminish the sum of crime and of suffering, and to raise the 
standard of intellectual cultivation and of material comfort among man- 
kind. | 

The public attention now began to be entirely engrossed by the prose- 
cution of Warren Hastings. The opinion of a subsequent generation 
has been, that this great man, who, in a time of national depression, and 
amidst appalling dangers, preserved and extended our Indian empire,— 


* 26 Parl. Hist. 596-608. 


LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 437 


although he had committed faults, and even crimes,—upon the whole 
deserved well of his country, and ought to have been honoured and re- 
warded. The opposition, however, misled by exaggerated accounts of 
his misconduct, eager to recover the popularity which they had lost by 
the Coalition, and surrendering themselves into the hands of the venge- 
ful Francis and the enthusiastic Burke, became his accusers, and were 
insensibly involved in the impeachment,—which, notwithstanding the 
unexampled éc/at attending it, conferred upon them as a party no last- 
ing credit or solid advantage. The suspicion is, that Pitt, a little alarmed 
by the high favour shown to Hastings at Court, and not displeased to 
see his own adversaries waste their strength in exposing the misgovern- 
ment of distant regions, instead of attacking his ministerial measures at 
home,—although he took a just view of the merits of the cause,—with 
professions of strict impartiality threw the weight of his influence into 
the scale of the prosecutors. But Thurlow—partly let us hope from a 
belief of the groundlessness of the charges (although he was not sup- 
posed to have had leisure or inclination to examine them)—partly to 
please the King and Queen, who took Mr. and Mrs. Hastings under 
their special protection*—partly from a desire to find a rival to Pitt, 
whom he ever regarded with secret enmity—warmly and openly em- 
braced the opposite side—enlarging without qualification on the distin- 
guished virtues and great services of the accused—and supporting him 
on every occasion ‘* with indecorous violence.” Pitt having professed 
scruples when the King hinted a wish that Hastings, a few months after 
his return, should be called to the Upper House, Thurlow treated these 
scruples with contempt, and said, ‘ there was nothing to prevent the 
holder of the Great Seal from taking the royal pleasure about a patent 
of peerage.” So encouraged, Hastings actually chose his barony. 
Having fulfilled the resolution he had formed when an orphan boy at 
a village school—to recover the estate which had been fcr many cen- 
turies in his family,—he now took his title from it, and declared that he 
would be “ Lord Daylesford of Daylesford, in the county of Worcester.” 
But Pitt put an end to all these speculations, after voting for him on the 
charge respecting the Robilla war,—one of the best established,—by 
voting against him on the charge respecting the treatment of Cheyte 
Sing,—one of the most unfounded,—although, when it was to be brought 
forward by Mr. Fox, a Treasury circular had been sent to all the min- 
isterial members, asking them to attend, and vote against it. Great 
was the astonishment of the friends of Mr. Hastings, and of the whole 





* In the libels of the day, this reception was ascribed less to the King’s sense of 
the services of the husband than to the presents made by his wife to the Queen.— 
Thus, in the famous Eclogue of * Tye Lyars,” we have Banks’s stanza to show the 
power of gold: . 


“ Say what that mineral, brought from distant climes, 
Which screens delinquents and absolves their crimes, 
Whose dazzling rays confound the space between 
A tainted strumpet and a spotless Queen.” 


t Macaulay’s Ess, iii. 429, 


438 REIGN OF GEORGE III 


House ; but it is said that, a few hours before the debate began, Pitt re- 
ceived intelligence of the intrigue respecting the peerage, and of Thur- 
low’s declaration that, under the King’s authority, he would put the 
Great Seal to the patent without consulting any other minister. The 
turn was so sudden that even the Attorney-General divided against the 
prime minister ; but the impeachment was carried by a majority of 119 
to 79. The other articles were voted without difficulty, and on the 14th 
day of May, 1787, Mr. Burke appeared at the bar of the House of Lords, 
attended by many members, and “ in the name of the House of Com- 
mons, and of all the Commons of England, impeached Warren Hastings, 
Esq., of high crimes and misdemeanours.” Thurlow was at no pains 
to conceal his disapprobation of the proceeding, and resolved to do every 
thing in his power to defeat it. 
; Mr. Hastings being arrested by the Serjeant-at-Arms 
[May 21, 1787] of the House of Commons, and handed over to the 
custody of the Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod, as the officer of the 
House of Lords, the Duke of Norfolk having proposed that he should be 
held to bail for 50,0002.,—the Lord Chancellor not improperly procured 
the sum to be reduced to 20,000/., with two sureties in 10,0002, each.* 
But the trial did not begin till the 13th of February 
[a.D: 1788.] . 

in the following year. ‘The charge not being capital, no 
Lord High Steward was appointed ; ; and Lord THUTOW: during the time 
he held the Great Seal, presided over it as Chancellor, or Speaker of 
the House of Lords, although, at the conclusion of it, having been de- 

prived of office, he was the lowest in dignity. 

‘“‘ There have been spectacles,” says Mr. Macaulay, “ more dazzling 
to the eye, more gorgeous with jewellery and cloth of gold, more 
attractive to grown-up children, than that which was now exhibited at 
Westminster; but, perhaps, there never was a spectacle so well calcu- 
lated to strike a highly cultivated, a reflecting, an imaginative mind, 
Stull the various kinds of interest which belong to the near and to the 
distant, to the present and to the past, were collected on one spot and in 
one hour. All the talents, and all the accomplishments which are 
developed by liberty and civilization, were now displayed with every 
advantage that could be derived both from co-operation and from contrast. 
Every step in the proceedings carried the mind either backward through 
many troubled centuries to the days when the foundations of our consti- 
tution were laid; or far away over boundless seas and deserts to dusky 
nations, living under strange stars, worshipping strange gods, and 
writing strange characters from right to left. The High Court of Par- 
liament was to sit according to forms handed down from the days of 
the Plantagenets, on an Englishman accused of exercising tyranny over 
the lord of the holy city of ‘Benares, and over the ladies of the princely 
House of Oude.”—I could only wish, that in the gorgeous description 
of the ceremonial which ollouresasarides the nobles, judges, orators, 
statesmen, beauties, artists, and men of letters, who are presented to us, 


* 26 Parl, Hist. 1217, 


LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 439 


we had been favoured with a view of the rugged Thurlow frowning on 
the woolsack, shaking his awful locks, terrible to behold. 

After the proclamation was made in Westminster Hall by the crier, 
that Warren Hastings, Esq., late Governor of Bengal, was now at his 
trial for high crimes and misdemeanours, with which he was charged 
by the Commons of Great Britain, and that all persons who had aught 
to allege against him were now to stand forth,—a general silence fol- 
lowed, and the Chancellor thus addressed the accused: ‘* Warren Has- 
tings, you are brought into this Court to answer to the charges preferred 
against you by the Knights, Burgesses, and Commons of Great Britain 
—charges now standing only as allegations, by them to be legally 
proved, or by you to be disproved. Bring forth your answers and 
defence with that seriousness, respect, and truth, due to accusers so 
respectable. ‘Time has been allowed you for preparation, proportioned 
to the intricacies in which the transactions are involved, and to the re- 
mote distances whence your documents may have been searched and 
required. You will still be allowed bail, for the better forwarding your 
defence, and whatever you can require will still be yours, of time, wit- 
nesses, and all things else you may hold necessary. ‘This is not granted 
you as any indulgence ; it is entirely your due: it is the privilege which 
every British subject has a-right to claim, and which may be claimed 
by every one who is brought before this high tribunal.” ‘* This speech,” 
(says Madame D’Arblay) ‘‘ uttered in a calm, equal, solemn manner, 
and in a voice mellow and penetrating, with eyes keen and black, yet 
softened into some degree of tenderness, whilst fastened full upon the 
prisoner,—this speech, its occasion, its portent, and its object, had an 
effect upon every hearer of producing the most respectful attention, and 
(out of the. Committee box at least) the strongest emotions in the cause 
of Mr. Hastings.”* 

As the trial proceeded, the first contest which arose was at the con- 
clusion of Mr. Burke’s great opening oration,—* whether each charge 
should be treated and concluded by speeches and evidence separately, 
or the Commons should be required to open all the charges, and give 
all their evidence in support of them, before the accused was called 
upon to begin his defence?” Mr. Fox strongly recommended the former 
mode of proceeding, for the sake of convenience and justice, and in 
pursuance of Parliamentary precedent—particularly the trial of Lord 
Strafford. 

Lord Chancellor.—“ Mr. Burke, whose imagination is of unparalleled 
fertility, in stating the case against the defendant, has mentioned cir- 


* It will be recollected that Miss Burney, then in the service of Queen Charlotte, 
partook of all the feelings of the Court in favour of Mr. Hastings. Describing the 
scene in Westminster Hall, she goes on to say—t Mr. Windham, then looking still 
at the spectacle, which indeed is the most splendid I ever saw, arrested his eyes 
upon the Chancellor. ‘ He looks very well from hence,’ cried he; ‘and how well 
he acquits himself on these solemn occasions! With what dignity, what loftiness, 
what high propriety he comports himself.’ This praise to the Chancellor, who is a 
known friend to Mr. Hastings, though I believe he would be the last to favour him 
unjustly now he is on trial, was a pleasant sound to my ear.” 


440 REIGN OF GEORGE ITI. 


cumstances of such accumulated horror, and of such deep criminality, 
that everything contained in the written articles of accusation before 
your Lordships sinks in the comparison to utter insignificance, and the 
Right Hon. manager has unequivocally declared that he has not as- 
sumed the privilege of an advocate to exaggerate. After this I shall 
hold him to the proof of all he has asserted, Acts of such atrocity, 
my Lords, were imputed to the defendant, that many very respectable 
persons who were present have not yet recovered, and probably never 
will recover, the shock they sustained at listening to the relation of them. 
But in proportion as Iam ready to punish Mr. Hastings with severity 
when lawfully convicted, [ must see that be has a full and fair oppor- 
tunity of vindicating his innocence. This he can only have by hearing 
all that is to be said or proved against him under all the charges, before 
he is called upon for his defence. With respect to the usage of Parlia- 
ment, of which we have been told so much, as contradistinguished from 
the common law, [ utterly disclaim all knowledge of it. It has no ex- 
istence. In times of barbarism, indeed, when to impeach a man was 
to ruin him by the strong hand of power, the usage of Parliament was 
quoted in order to justify the most arbitrary proceedings. In these en- 
lightened days I hope that no man will be tried but by the law of the 
land, which is admirably calculated to protect innocence and to punish 
guilt. The trial of Lord Strafford was, from beginning to end, marked 
by violence and injustice. A licentious and unprincipled fellow, Pym, 
attacked that noble Lord with all the virulence and malignity of faction. 
The real crime of that great statesman was, that he had quitted his 
party—as if it were not meritorious to serve the state instead of a fac- 
tion—as if it were a crime to quit a gang of highwaymen. ‘The Com- 
mons may impeach, but your Lordships try the cause, and the same 
rules of procedure and of evidence which obtain in the Couris below, I 
am sure will be rigidly followed by your Lordships.” Lord Loughbo- 
rough strongly supported the opposite side, but was beaten by a majority 
of 88 to 33,—which very distinctly intimated what, at a distant period, 
would be the final result of the prosecution.* 

The only other matter of public interest in which Thurlow took part 
before the King’s illness threw the country into confusion, was “ Afri- 
can Slavery.” <A great change of sentiment had taken place since the 
times when the AssrenTo treaty was negotiated, securing to us, with the 
joy and applause of all parties in the state, in addition to our own slave 
trade, the privilege of supplying with slaves the colonies of other na- 
tions, From the immortal efforts of Granville Sharpe, Clarkson, and 
Wilberforce, the traffic in human flesh now began to be viewed by many 
with abhorrence, and even some zealous defenders of whatever is estab- 
lished occasionally doubted whether the practice of acquiring by force 
or by fraud the possession of human beings, removing them for ever 
from their native shore, and after the indescribable horrors of their pas- 
sage across the ocean, condemning the survivors and their progeny to 


* 27 Parl. Hist. 55-65, 


LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 44] 


interminable toil for the profit of strangers, under the stimulus of whip- 
ping and torture,—was quite consistent with the dictates of humanity, 
and with the religion of Jesus, who had taught us to consider and to 
treat all mankind as brethren, and “‘ to do unto others as we would that 
they should do unto us.” In the session of 1788, the subject was brought 
before the House of Commons, and Mr. Pitt, with the fervour and sin- 
cerity of youth, supported the views of those who were resolved to free 
the country from this disgraceful stain. 

As a preliminary measure, a bill was passed to mitigate the atrocities 
of the “* Middle Passage,” by enacting that slave-ships should not carry 
beyond a certain number of slaves in proportion to their tonnage,—evi- 
dence having been given at the bar, that in those ships no slave had a 
space to lie in more than five feet six inches in length, by sixteen inches 
in breadth; that not only the decks were covered with bodies thus 
stowed, but that between the decks and the ceiling there were often plat- 
forms or broad shelves similarly covered; that the slaves were chained 
two and two together by their hands and feet, and were fastened by ring 
bolts to the deck ; that the ‘‘ dancing” boasted of to prove their cheer- 
fulness, consisted in compelling them to jump a certain time daily on 
the deck in irons for their health; that the mortality among them was 
appalling; and that sometimes, when not watched, large numbers of 
them, from despair, leaped overboard and were drowned.* When the 
bill came up to the House of Lords, the Chancellor opposed it in his 
peculiar manner, by saying, * that as it stood it was zonsense, and that 
he concluded some amendment would be proposed to correct the 2on- 
sense of one part of it with the 2zonsense of the other.” He afterwards 
boldly spoke out, saying: ‘ [t appears that the French have offered pre- 
miums to encourage the African trade, and that they have succeeded. 
The natural presumption therefore is, that we ought to do the same. 
For my part, my Lords, I have no scruple to say that if the ‘ five days’ 
fit of philanthropy’ which has just sprung up, and which has slept for 
twenty years together, were allowed to sleep one summer longer, it 
would appear to me rather more wise than thus to take up a subject 
piecemeal, which it has been publicly declared ought not to be agitated 
at all till next session of Parliament. Perhaps, by such imprudence, 
the slaves themselves may be prompted, by their own authority, to pro- 
ceed at once toa ‘ total and immediate abolition of the trade.’ One wit- 
ness has come to your Lordships’ bar with a face of wo—his eyes full 
of tears, and his countenance fraught with horror, and said, ‘ My Lords, 
I am ruined if you pass this bill! I have risked 30,0007. on the trade 
this year! It is all 1 have been able to gain by my industry, and if I 
lose it I must go to the hospital!’ I desire of you to think of such 
things, my Lords, in your humane phrenzy, and to show some humanity 
to the whites as well as to the negroes.” But Mr. Pitt would not allow 
the Government to be disgraced by the rejection of the bill. It passed 
the Lords, with some amendments for granting compensation, and these 


* There are several cases in the Law Reports on the question, ‘whether the 
underwriters were liable for the death of slaves from suicide ?” 


442 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


being objected to by the Commons on the score of privilege, another bill 
to the same effect passed both Houses, and received the royal assent.* 





CHAPTER CLX, 


. 
CONTINUATION OF THE LIFE OF LORD THURLOW TILL HE WAS FINALLY 
DISMISSED FROM THE OFFICE OF CHANCELLOR, 


In the midst of profound tranquillity at home and abroad, the nation 

was suddenly thrown into a state of the greatest consternation and 
[a. p. 1788.] alarm by the avowal of his Majesty’s complete incapacity 

bis div ‘1 to exercise any of the functions of his high office. It is 
now known that he had laboured under a similar illness, for a few 
weeks, in the year 1765, which was the cause of the regency bill then 
passed ; but the fact was successfully concealed from the public.t The 
symptoms now returned upon him, at first rather gradually, causing 
unexampled embarrassment to his Ministers. Near the close of the 
preceding session of Parliament his Majesty was occasionally in a very 
excited state, and when he returned from his visit to Cheltenham, there 
appeared still greater cause for apprehension. Parliament stood pro- 
rogued to the 25th of September. 

When that day approached, the King had still intervals of clear un- 
derstanding, and exhibited demonstrations of accurate perception and 
an undiminished power of reasoning. A council was held, which went 
off very quietly,—when an order was made for a further prorogation, 
and his Majesty signed a warrant for a commission to pass the Great 
Seal for that purpose, and Parliament was, with the usual solemnities, 
prorogued by the Lord Chancellor till the 20th of November, zhen to 
meet for the despatch of business. 

At a levée held at St. James’s before that day arrived, his Majesty’s 
[Ocr. 24, 1788,] conversation and demeanour left no doubt in the 

‘/ mind of any who were present as to the nature of his 
malady. It was immediately after necessary to put him under restraint ; 
his life for some days was considered to be in imminent danger,—and 
when this paroxysm subsided he was still totally and constantly de- 
prived of the use of reason. The royal sufferer was removed first to 
Windsor, and afterwards to Kew,—where he was put under the care of 
Dr. Willis, and other physicians supposed to be best acquainted with 
the treatment of alienation of mind. 

Mr. Pitt, whether right or wrong in the opinion he formed, resolved 


* 27 Parl. Hist. 638-649. 

+ It had been stated by Smollett, in his history of the commencement of this 
reign: but only a few copies containing the statement were sold : they were eagerly 
bought up by the Government, and the faint whisper which they caused died away. 
~-Adolphus, i, 177. 


LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 443 


at once, ina direct and straightforward manner, to delay as long as 
possible the transfer of the power of the Crown to the Prince of Wales, 
now leagued with the Whigs, and looked upon with distrust by the 
nation on account of his profligate habits ;—to limit materially the 
exercise of the royal prerogative in the Prince’s hands ;—to intrust the 
custody of the King’s person, and the patronage of the royal household, 
to the Queen ;—and, for these purposes, to contend that the two 
Houses of Parliament had the right to appoint a Regent, and to define 
‘and restrain the authority under which he was to act. The Prime 
Minister, assuming for certain that he himself would be dismissed on 
the accession of the Regent, and wishing to diminish the influence of 
his successor, had to struggle boldly fora crippled regency,—on the 
ostensible ground that the rights of the Sovereign supposed to be on 
the throne might otherwise be endangered. 

But the Chancellor was in sad perplexity. Although only a few 
weeks before he thought that he held the Great Seal for life, the dread- 
ful thought now arose that it would be snatched from him by his rival, 
who had lately seemed for ever destined to the punishment of listening 
to the drowsy Serjeants in the Court of Common Pleas. But Thurlow 
began to consider with himself whether, having been Chancellor under 
Lord Rockingham as well as under Lord North, he might not be 
Chancellor under Mr. Fox as well as under Mr. Pitt. Mr. Fox had 
not yet returned from his Italian tour, and the Prince’s affairs were 
under the direction of Sheridan and other Whig leaders, who were im- 
patient to see the Prince installed as Regent, who highly disrelished the 
threatened restrictions, who perceived how useful Thurlow might be if 
gained over in.furthering these objects, who dexterously guessed at his 
longings and cogitations, and who formed a just estimate of his regard 
for honour and consistency. 

The intrigue with Thurlow is supposed to have been first suggested 
by Captain Rayne, the comptroller of the Prince’s household. In a 
letter to Sheridan he said, * [ think the Chancellor might take a good 
opportunity to break with his colleagues if they propose restrictions. 
The law authority would have great weight with us, as well as prevent- 
ing even a design of moving the city.” In consequence, a negotiation 
with the Chancellor was opened, to which the Prince himself was a 
party. The legal dignitary seemed very placable, and not much dis- 
inclined to the doctrine that ‘* the Prince ought to be declared unre 
stricted Regent,” although he took special care, at first, to deal only in 
general verbal assurances, without entering into any specific engage- 
ment.* In this state of affairs, Captain Rayne, again addressing 
Sheridan, said, ‘* [ inclose you the copy of a letter the Prince has just 


* “ He studiously sought intercourse with the Prince of Wales, that he might 
have an apportunity of conveying to him his sentiments on his Royal Highness’s 
situation. He recommended to him to lie upon his oars,—io show no impatience 
to assume the powers of royalty. » He pointed out to him that if the King’s ijlness 
were of any considerable dyration, the regency must necessarily deyolve upon him,” 


—Nich, Recall. 71, 


444 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


written to the Chancellor and sent by express, which will give you the 
outline of the conversation with the Prince as well as the situation of 
the King’s health. I think it an advisable measure, as it is a sword 
that cuts both ways, without being unfit to be shown to whom he pleases, 
but which I think he will understand best himself.” 

Thurlow, before he would proceed further, required a distinct pro- 
mise that under the Regency he should retain the Great Seal. ‘This at 
first caused much difficulty, for Lord Loughborough had been acting 
with the Whigs ever since the formation of the Coalition Ministry ; a 
five years’ opposition had made them forget all former differences, and 
it was well understood that he was to gain the grand object of his am- 
bition if they ever came into power. Sheridan, however, advised that, 
without consulting him, Thurlow, who spurned at the Presidency of the 
Council, should be bought at his own price, and the bargain was nearly 
concluded that Thurlow, in consideration of being appointed Chancellor 
under the Prince when Regent, should support the right of the Prince to 
succeed to the Regency without restriction. 

This was the state of affairs when Fox arrived from Italy. Recol- 
lecting what had happened during the Rockingham administration, he 
had an absolute horror of Thurlow, and heard of the promise given to 
him with the most bitter regret. However, as things had gone so far, 
he wrote the following letter to Sheridan, showing his distrust as well 
as his acquiescence :— 


‘¢ Dear Sheridan, 

“‘] have swallowed the pill—a’ most bitter one it was—and have 
written to Lord Loughborough, whose answer of course, must be con- 
sent, What is to be done next? Should the Prince himself, you, or 
I, or Warren, be the person to speak to the Chancellor? The objec- 
tion to the last is, that he must probably wait for an opportunity, and 
that no time is to be lost. Pray tell me what is to be done. I am con- 
vineed after all that the negotiation will not succeed, and am not sure 
that I am sorry for it. I do not remember ever feeling so uneasy 
about any political thing I ever did in my life.” 


On hearing of this intrigue, so fatal to his hopes, Lord Loughborough 
wrote the following letter to Sheridan, by which he tried to counteract 
it, without disclosing the deep resentment which he felt :— 


“ My dear S. 

“‘T was afraid to continue the conversation on the circumstance of 
the inspection committed to the Chancellor, lest the reflections that arise 
upon it might have made too strong an impression on some of our 
neighbours last night. It does indeed appear to me full of mischief, 
and of that sort most likely to affect the apprehensions of our friends 
(Lord John for instance), and to increase their reluctance to take any 
active part, 


“The Chancellor’s object evidently is to make his way by himself, 


LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 445 


and he has managed hitherto as one very well practised in that game. 
His conversations both with you and Mr. Fox were encouraging, but at 
the same time checked all explanations on his part, under a pretence of 
delicacy towards his colleagues. When he let them go to Salthill, and 
contrived to dine at Windsor, he certainly took a step that most men 
would have felt not very delicate in its appearance, and, unless there 
was some private understanding between him and them, not altogether 
fair, especially if you add to it the sort of conversation he held with 
regard to them, I cannot help thinking that the difficulties of managing 
the patient have been exerted or improved to lead to the proposal of his 
inspection (without the Prince being conscious of it), for by that situa- 
tion he gains an easy and frequent access to him, and an opportunity 
of possessing the confidence of the Queen. I believe this the more 
-from the account of the tenderness he showed at his first interview, for 
I am sure it is not his character to feel any. With a little instruction 
from Lord Hawkesbury, the sort of management that was carried on 
by means of the Princess Dowager in the early part of the reign may 
easily be practised. In short, I think he will try to find the key of the 
backstairs—and with that in his pocket, take any situation that pre- 
serves his access, and enables him to hold a line between different 
parties. In the present moment, however, he has taken a position that 
puts the command of the House of Lords in his hands. 

‘<[ wish Mr. Fox and you would give these considerations what 
weight you think they deserve, and try if any means can be taken to 
remedy this mischief, if it appears in the same light to you.” 

This surely must be an exaggerated picture of Thurlow’s craft and 
duplicity ; — otherwise, since the time of Richard III., these qualities 
have not been exhibited in such an extraordinary degree by any cha- 
racter in English history. The Chancellor is here represented as in- 
terfering with the proper management of the illustrious patient for his 
own sinister ends — when admitted to the presence of his afflicted So- 
vereign, although untouched by the melancholy spectacle, and only 
anxious about the personal advantages he might derive from it, hypo- 
critically throwing himself into an agony of tears—plotting alike against 
his present colleagues, and the party whorn he pretended to be about to 
join—and appearing by turns to be devoted to his old royal master—to 
the Queen—to the Prince—to the Tories, and to the Whigs — ready to 
betray them all.* However much this letter might strengthen the sus- 


* It must be admitted that Lord Loughborough is powerfully corroborated by the 
very picturesque account we have of “ the weeping scene” from Miss Burney, who, 
then in attendance on the Queen, actually witnessed it: ‘It was decreed that the 
King should be seen both by the Chancellor and Mr. Pitt. The Chancellor went 
into his presence with a tremor such as before he had been only. accustomed to 
inspire ; and when he came out he was so extremely affected by the state in which 
he saw his royal master and patron, that the tears ran down his cheeks, and his feet 
had difficulty to support him. Mr. Pitt was more composed, but expressed his grief 
with so much respect and attachment, that it added new weight tothe universal ad. 
miration with which he is heré beheld.”’—Madame d’ Arblay’s Diary, part. vii. 338, 

The Chancellor seems to have possessed powers of acting grief not inferior to 
those of the player in Hamlet, who— 


446 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


picions entertained by the Prince’s friends of Thurlow’s sincerity, it did 
not induce them to break off the treaty with him, and if he supported 
them in the impending discussions in Parliament, the Great Seal was to 
be his. 

The King being confined at Windsor, the Queen and the Prince in 
opposite interests, had both taken up their residence here, and here Mr. 
Pitt and the Ministers from time to time held their councils. These 
arrangements were highly convenient to Thurlow, for by going through 
cloisters and dark corridors to different sets of apartments in the Castle, 
he could hold a private conference with either party, without letting it 
be known that he communicated with the other. Mr. Pitt was at first 
duped by such artifices, but suddenly came to the full knowledge of his 
colleague’s perfidy. The exact circumstances of the discovery are va- 
riously related, although all accounts agree in stating that it took place 
at a meeting of the Ministers in Windsor Castle, and that it arose from 
a mistake that the Chancellor made respecting his hat. Some say that 
he entered the room, having under his arm the Prince’s hat, which he 
had in the hurry carried off from the Prince’s closet instead of his own ; 
—others, that he walked into the room without a hat, and that soon 
after one of the Prince’s pages brought him his own hat, saying that 
his Lordship had left it behind when he took leave of his Royal High- 
ness ;—and others, that entering without his hat, and being reminded 
of it, he immediately said, he supposed he must have left it in another 
part of the Castle, where he had been paying a visit ;—-whereupon the 
looks of those present immediately made him conscious of the disclo- 
sure he had made.*. But I have received the following account of the 
discovery from a quarter entitled to the most implicit credit :—‘* When 
a Council was to be held at Windsor to determine the course which 
Ministers should pursue, Thurlow had been there some time before any 
of his colleagues arrived. He was to be brought back to London by 
one of them, and the moment of departure being come, the Chancellor’s 
hat was nowhere to be found. After a fruitless search in the apartment 
where the Council had been held, a page came with the hat in his hand, 
saying aloud, and with great maiveté, ‘My Lord, | found it in the closet 
of His Royal Highness the Prince cf Wales!’ The other Ministers were 
still in the Hall, and Thurlow’s confusion corroborated the inference 
which they drew.” 

Mr. Pitt, though now fully aware of his designs, could not immedi- 
ately throw him off, and still seemed to the public cordially to co-ope- 
rate with him, but thenceforth withdrew all confidence from him, and 


“ But in a fiction, in a dream of passion, 
Could form his soul so to his own conceit, 
That from her working all his visage wann’d, 
Tears in his eyes, distraction in ’s aspect, 
A broken voice, and his whole function suiting 
With forms to his conceit.” 


* Moore’s Life of Sheridan, ii. 31 ; Law. Mag. vii. 73, 74. 


LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 447 


intrusted to Lord Camden the conduct in the House of Lords of all the 
measures for the establishment of the Regency. 

The first debate upon the subject was when, after the examination of 
the physicians, proving the King’s incapacity person- [Dec. 11, 1788.] 
ally to exercise the functions of government, Lord 
Camden moved for a committee to search for precedents. Lord Lough- 
borough, on whose legal and constitutional advice the Whigs acted, now 
reprobated the doctrine broached in the other House, “ that the Prince 
of Wales, the heir-apparent to the throne, had no more right to take 
upon himself the government, during the continuance of the unhappy 
malady which incapacitated his Majesty, than any other individual sub- 
ject.” He contended strenuously that the Regency was not elective ; 
that the two Houses could not interfere with the appointment of the per- 
son to exercise the functions of royalty, except upon a total subversion 
of the government, as at the Revolution, or upon the failure of the royal 
line, by the King dying without an heir; that as the two Houses at pre- 
sent confessedly could not pass a turnpike act, much less could they 
pass an act which might produce a change of the dynasty to fill the 
throne; and that the heir-apparent had a right, during the interruption 
of the personal exercise of the royal authority, to assume the reins of 
government—not rashly or violently—but on the authentic notification 
to him by the.two Houses of his Majesty’s unfortunate incapacity. 

Thurlow, on this occasion, was sorely perplexed as to the course he 
should pursue. Although Dr. Willis gave hopes of the King’s speedy 
recovery, the general opinion at this time was that his malady was in- 
curable —in which case the Prince of Wales must ere long be Regent, 
with all the patronage of the Crown. He probably was inclined to 
assert the Prince’s right in still more peremptory terms, and to outbid 
his rival for the Prince’s favour. But he could not do so without openly 
breaking with Mr, Pitt, who had the entire confidence of the Queen, and 
was sure to be more powerful than ever if his Majesty should indeed be 
restored. He therefore contented himself, for the present, with appear- 
ing to oppose—but opposing very gently—Lord Loughborough’s argu- 
ments, saying, ‘‘that the doctrine of the Prince’s right was new; that 
the discussion was premature; that the question ought not to be in any 
degree preoccupied; that such a debate would only afford a subject for 
a frivolous paragraph in a newspaper; that their Lordships had begun 
at the wrong end, trying to draw the conclusion before they had settled 
the premises; that no objection could possibly be made to the motion 
of the President of the Council for a committee to inquire; and that, 
it being impossible to separate the natural and political character and 
capacity of the King, while the crown remained firmly fixed on his 
Majesty’s head, the appointment of a Regent must prove a consumma- 
tion beyond -expression difficult.”* The motion was carried without a 
division, and for a little while longer Thurlow contrived to keep on de- 
cent terms with both parties, giving each hopes of his support and enjoy- 


* 27 Parl. Hist. 672. 


448 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


ing the chance of the favour of both. But this double-dealing led him 
daily into greater perplexities: he saw the danger in a protracted strug- 
gle of being himself disgraced whichever side might prosper, and it is 
said that he had exclusive information of some symptoms in his Majesty’s 
health, which justified a more probable hope of his recovery than had 
been hitherto entertained. : 
Accordingly the next time the subject was brought forward in the 
House of Lords, the Duke of York having made a very 
[Dzc. 15.] : sei alee 
sensible speech, renouncing, in the name of his brother, 
any claim not derived from the will of the people, and lamenting the 
dreadful calamity which had fallen upon the royal family and upon the 
nation,—the Lord Chancellor left the woolsack seemingly in a state of 
great emotion, and delivered a most pathetic address to the House. 
His voice, broken at first, recovered its clearness,—but this was from 
the relief afforded to him by a flood of tears, He declared his fixed 
and unalterable resolution to stand by a Sovereign who, through a reign 
of twenty-seven years, had proved his sacred regard to the principles 
which seated his family on the British throne. He at last worked him- 
self up to this celebrated climax :—** A noble Viscount (Stormont) has, 
in an eloquent and energetic manner, expressed his feelings on the pre- 
sent melancholy situation of his Majesty,—feelings rendered more poig- 
nant from the noble Viscount’s having been in habits of personally re- 
ceiving marks of indulgence and kindness from his suffering Sovereign. 
My own sorrow, my Lords, is aggravated by the same cause. My 
debt of gratitude is indeed ample for the many favours which have been 
graciously conferred upon me by his Majesty; anp wHen I ForGET 
MY SOVEREIGN, MAY My Gop FORGET ME!”* ‘Gop FORGET you!” 
muttered Wilkes, who happened then to be seated on the steps of the 
throne,—eyeing him askance with his inhuman squint and demoniac 
grin,—‘ Gop rorGET you! He’LL sEE you D D FIRST.” 
When the resolution to which the Commons had agreed was moved, 
[Dec. 23.] «That it is the right and duty of the Lords Spiritual and 
* “4 Temporal, and Commons of Great Britain, now assembled, 
and lawfully, fully, and freely representing all the estates of the people 
of this realm, to provide the means of supplying the defect of the per- 
sonal exercise of the royal authority, arising from his Majesty’s indis- 
position, in such manner as the exigency of the case may appear to 
them to require,” and Lord Rawdon (afterwards Marquis of Hastings) 
having moved an amendment, ‘‘’T'hat an humble address be presented 
to his Royal Highness the Prince of Wales, praying his Royal High- 
ness to take upon himself, as sole Regent, the administration of the 
executive government in the King’s name during his Majesty’s indispo- 
sition,” Thurlow, without any reserve, supported the resolution, and 
inveighed against the amendment. Knowing well that it had been 
framed very carefully by Lord Loughborough, who had spoken ably in 
defence of it, he said, «I am glad to think that the words of this amend- 





* 27 Parl. Hist. 680; Ann. Reg. 1789, p. 125. 








LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 449 


ment cannot have been supplied by the noble and learned Lord, the 
Chief Justice of the Common Pleas, for they are not only irreconcilable 
with the arguments of that great Magistrate, but they convey no dis- 
tinct or precise meaning whatever. I wish that some one who professes 
to understand them, had explained their meaning, and had given us 
something like a reason to show their propriety. I beg to know, what 
is the meaning of the term‘ Recent?’ Where shall | see it defined ? 
in what law-book, or'in what statute? I have heard of ‘Grand Jus- 
ticiars,’ of ‘ Custodes Regni,’ of * Lieutenants for the King,’ of ‘ Guar- 
dians,’ of ‘ Protectors,’ of ‘ Lords Justices ;’ but I know nothing of the 
office or functions of a ‘ Recent.’ To what end, then, would it be to ask 
the Prince to take upon himself an office, the boundaries of which are 
wholly unascertained? The amendment, to be sure, states that what 
the Prince, as sole Regent, is to be prayed to take upon himself, is ‘ the 
administration of the executive government.’ Here, again, the expres- 
sion is dark and equivocal. What is meant by the ‘executive govern- 
ment?’ Does it mean the whole royal authority? Does it mean the 
power of legislation? Does it mean all the Sovereign’s functions, 
without restriction or limitation of any kind? If this had been fully 
expressed, would any noble Lord have codtended that it did not amount 
to the actual dethroning of his Majesty, and wresting the sceptre out of 
his hand? No man entertains a higher respect for the Prince than I 
do; I wish him as well as those who affect to be more mindful of his 
interests ; but [ deny that, as heir-apparent, he has any inherent right 
to the regency. It is our duty to preserve the Crown safe on the head 
of the Sovereign, so that when, in the due course of nature, it shall de- 
scend to the Prince of Wales, he may receive it solid and entire, such 
as it was when worn by his Sire.” On a division, the amendment was 
negatived by a majority of 99 to 66.* 

Next a proceeding took place, which I will not venture to condemn, 
but which was certainly very anomalous, and I con- 
ceive, unnecessary ; for if is two Houses had the Tedeschi. 
right claimed by them to elect a Regent, why should they not have 
passed an ordinance for that purpose by their own mere. authority, 
without the false assertion that it was by a regular act of legislation, to 
which the King was a party 7} There is nothing better settled by our 
law, than that the Great Seal can only be used to express the will of 
the Sovereign on the throne, and infinite precautions are resorted to for 
the purpose of preventing the use of it without his personal intervention. 
To counterfeit the Great Seal is high treason,—and to affix the true 
Great Seal to any instrument without the King’s authority is not sub- 
jected to the like penalty, only because the offence is supposed to be 


* 27 Parl. Hist. 852-891. 

+ The joint resolution of the two Houses ordering the commission, required that 
the authority for putting the Great Seal to it should be thus falsely stated: “ By the 
King himself, with the advice of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and Commons 
assembled, according to the prorogation aforesaid.” 

t See ante, Vol. I. Introduction, 


VOL. V. 29 


450 REIGN OF GEORGE Iit. 


impossible. But while George III. was under the care of Dr. Willis, 
Edward Lord Thurlow affixed the Great Seal of Great Britain, autho- 
rizing certain prelates and peers to open the Parliament in the King’s 
name, and to declare the causes of Parliament being summoned. 

On account of a severe fit of illness, the Chancellor was not himself 
present at the ceremony of opening the Parliament under the authority 
of the ‘* Phantom,” and the Lords Commissioners’ speech was deli- 
vered by Ex-chancellor Earl Bathurst.* 

At this time, although Thurlow had ceased to have any communica- 
tion with Carlton House, and Mr, Pitt looked upon him with great sus- 
picion, he enjoyed the highest confidence and favour with the Queen, 
and she implicitly followed his advice in all her proceedings respecting 
the formation of the Regency,—that she might have the custody of the 
King’s person, and the nomination to all the offices in the household, 
The Prince of Wales having remonstrated with her upon the danger to 
the monarchy from so materially reducing the power and influence of 
the Crown, she employed Thurlow to prepare an answer in her name. 
The following note conveyed her thanks to him for his exertions on 
this occasion :— 


‘¢ My Lord, 

‘‘f am this instant returned from the King, which is the reason of 
your servant being detained so long. I return you many thanks for 
the trouble you have taken in forming so useful an answer for me to 
the Prince of Wales, which I intend sending to-morrow morning. I[ 
am extremely sorry to hear of your indisposition, and I hope you will 
believe me when I say that nobody does more sincerely interest them- 
selves in your recovery and welfare than myself. 

*< CHARLOTTE. 

* Kew, January the 31st, 1789.”"t 


When the Commons sent up the Regency Bill (to which it was in- 
tended to give the royal assent by the “ Phantom,”) Thurlow strenu- 
ously supported all the restrictions put upon the power of the Regent, 
and the clause vesting in the Queen the nomination of all the officers of 
the household. Upon the last point he was particularly eloquent and 
touching. ‘ My opinion, my Lords,” said he, “is, that all which be- 
longs to the household must, at the same time with the care of the 
King’s person, be put under her Majesty’s control and management. 


* 27 Parl. Hist. 1163. One of the most ludicrous difficulties in which the House 
of Commons was now involved arose from the sudden death of Speaker Cornwall, 
and the election of Mr. W. Grenville to succeed him, Regularly the new Speaker 
should have been approved by the King, and should have prayed for a continuance 
of the rights and privileges of Commons. Burke said, “They had just set up a 
‘phantom’ to represent the Great Seal, and now their Speaker was to bow before it, 
and to elaim their rights and privileges from a creature of their own creation,” 
However, they altogether waived the ceremony.—27 Parl. Hist. 1161. 

+ The original, in a very distinct pretty hand, lies before me. Queen Charlotte 
not only gained a familiar acquaintance with our language, but became, in all 
respects, a good Englishwoman. 





LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 451 


To preserve the King’s dignity, all his royal attendants must be kept 
about him. If you deprive the King of his accustomed splendour, you 
may as well treat him as a parish pauper—put him on board wages, or 
send him to one of those receptacles that take in unfortunate people at 
a small charge. This would be the only way to prevent the royal house- 
hold going to the Queen—but then you are losing your time in contriving 
means of restoring his Majesty to the throne on his recovery, for you 
never can expect a cure. Remember, my Lords, that the Queen is to 
have the care of her royal patient, not as a wretched outcast, an obscure 
individual, without friends, without a name, without reputation, without 
honour—but as a King to whom his people look up with loyalty, with 
affection, and with anxious wishes that he may soon be enabled to re- 
ascend his throne, and again spread blessings over the land he governs, 
As far as my voice can go, and I shall lift it up loudly and sincerely,” 
[Here he rolled out his sentences majestically, and shook his awe- 
inspiring eyebrows, ] ‘I claim for the King all the dignity that ought to 
attend a royal person, who is entitled to every comfort that can be ad- 
ministered to him in the hour of his calamity. And who shall dare to 
refuse my demand? It would, it ought, and it must mortify the Queen 
if the King were turned over to her in an unfeeling and irreverent 
fashion—destitute of every.mark and remnant of royal state. Is there 
a man who hears me—who possesses the sensibility common to every 
human breast, who does not sympathize with her Majesty?” [Here he 
began to be much affected.] ‘I protest to God I do not believe there 
is a noble Lord in the House who wishes to reduce to such a forlorn 
condition a King labouring under a misfortune, equal to any misfortune 
that ever happened since misfortune was known in the world. To hesi- 
tate about giving the household to the Queen, would show a total extinc- 
tion of pity for that royal sufferer, whose calamity entitles him to the 
most unlimited compassion, and even to increased respect : 
‘ Deserted in his utmost need 
By those his former bounty fed.’ ”’* 

Here the orator burst into tears, and he resumed his seat on the wool- 
sack as if still unable to give vent by language to his tenderness. 

These exhibitions were probably pretty justly appreciated in the 
House of Lords where the actor was known, and they must have caused 
a little internal tittering, although no noble Lord would venture openly 
to treat them with ridicule. But they made a prodigious impression on 
the public. His Majesty was now very popular, particularly contrasted 


* 27 Parl. Hist. 1081, 1082, 1085. 

+ Thurlow alluded to Burke’s speech in the House of Commons: “It had been 
asked, would they strip the King of every mark of royalty, and transfer all the dig- 
nities of the Crown to another person? No, Heaven forbid! where the person 
wearing the crown could lend a grace (> those dignities, and derive a lustre from 
the splendour of his household. But did they recollect that they were talking of a 
sick King, of a monarch smitten by the hand of Omnipotence, and that the Almighty 
had hurled him from his throne and plunged him into a condition which drew down 
upon him the pity of the meanest peasant in his kingdom?” Burke was called to 
order for these words, and certainly they are not in the best taste. 


452 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


with the heir apparent, and his calamity did excite deep sympathy in the 
great bulk of the nation, ‘There was a general apprehension that, if the 
Prince’s friends once got into power, the good old King would soon be 
treated as irrecoverable. Thurlow was therefore hailed as a champion 
of the rights of the Sovereign, and he was supposed to be disinterestedly 
standing up for his afflicted Master, designedly and nobly sacrificing all 
prospect of power for the rest of his days. Men compared him to the 
Earl of Kent in Lear, and, thinking they had found in real life an ex- 
emplification of the devoted attachment which the poet had imagined, 
were delighted to see the friendship which had long subsisted between 
the Sovereign and his Chancellor, though obscured in the alienated 
mind of the afflicted George, still burning in the honest bosom of the 
faithful Thurlow.* 
Some, however, ironically exclaimed,— 





“ He cannot flatter, he! 

An honest mind and plain—he must speak truth! 
—These kind of knaves I know, which in this plainness 
Harbour more craft and more corrupter ends 

Than twenty silly ducking observants, 

That stretch their duties nicely.” 


A few days after this last lachrymose scene, Burke said openly in the 
House of Commons :—‘ The Lords had perhaps not yet recovered from 
that extraordinary burst of the pathetic which had been exhibted before 
them the other evening; they had not yet dried their eyes or been re- 
stored to their former placidity, and were unqualified to attend to new 
business, ‘The tears shed in that House on the occasion to which he 
alluded, were not the tears of patriots for dying laws, but of Lords for 
their expiring places. The iron tears which flowed down Pluto’s cheek 
rather resembled the dismal bubbling of the Styx than the gentle mur- 
muring streams of Aganippe.”T 

On another occasion Burke descended so low as to draw a caricature 
likeness of the Chancellor for the-amusement of the House of Com- 
mons. Commenting on the scheme by which the phantom of royalty 
was to be raised by touching the Great Seal, he said—‘* What is to be 
done when the Crown is ina deliquium? It was intended, he had heard, 
to set up a man with black brows and a large wig, a kind of scarecrow 
to the two Houses, who was to give a fictitious assent in the royal name, 
and this to’be binding on the people.”{ He added,—‘ I have given my 
allegiance already to the House of Hanover. I worship the Gods of 
our glorious constitution, but I will not worship Prrarus.” 

Alas! the Whigs were disappointed, and the laugh was finally with 
the object of their vituperation. When the Regency Bill, with its re- 
strictive clauses, had been read a second time in the House of Lords, 
and had made some progress in the Committee, rumours were publicly 


* Thus wrote his old companion Cowper, who might have known him better: 
“In his counsels, under the blessing of Providence, the remedy is, I believe, to be 
found, if a remedy there be. His integrity, firmness, and sagacity, are the only 
human means that seem adequate to the great emergence.” 

t Burke’s Speeches, iii. 382. t Burke’s Speeches, iii. 361. 


LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 453 


spread that the King’s malady was abating, and lad vere 1789.] 
the 19thof February, as soon as prayers were over, 

the Lord Chancellor left the woolsack, and said,— The intelligence 
from Kew was that day so favourable every noble Lord would agree 
with him in acknowledging that it would be indecent to proceed farther 
with the bill when it might become wholly unnecessary. Amidst the 
general joy which the expectation of his Majesty’s speedy return must 
occasion, he would therefore move the adjournment of the Committee.” 
This was agreed to, and the House rose, 

On a subsequent day the Chancellor declared that he had lately been 
as much as an hour and a quarter with the King, and that (Fen. 24.] 
very day a full hour—when he had found his mind to be in 
clear and distinct, and that he appeared perfectly capable of conversing 
on any subject that might be proposed to him. The Committee was 
several times adjourned, and at last, on the 10th of March, there was 
produced a commission to which the Great Seal had been regularly put, 
under a warrant, signed by the King, authorizing the same Commis- 
sioners named in the sham commission “‘to open and declare certain 
farther causes for holding this Parliament.” ‘Then the Commons being 
summoned, and the Commission read, the Chancellor, one of the Com- 
missioners, said, ‘‘ His Majesty being, by the blessing of Providence, 
recovered from the severe indisposition with which he has been afflicted, 
and being enabled to attend to the public affairs of this kingdom, has 
commanded us to convey to you his warmest acknowledgments for the 
additional proofs which you have given of your affectionate attachment 
to his person, and of your zealous concern for the honour and interest 
of his crown, and the security and good government of his dominions,” 

Thurlow retained the Great Seal, but his character was seriously in- 
jured. Although he impressed on the Queen, and on the 
King when recovered, a conviction of his zeal to compl Coat hinag 

& ? Rid 
with their wishes, his colleagues, as well as his opponents, were fully 
aware of his insincerity, and by degrees the full extent of his double- 
dealing during the King’s illness became known to the whole nation. 

From this time he fostered a deep enmity to Mr. Pitt, which he was 
at no pains to conceal. Considering himself the personal “ friend,” 
and most cherished minister of the King,—boasting that the House of 
Lords was entirely under his control],—and unconscious of his reputa- 
tion with the public,—he greatly over-estimated his political importance, 
and was disposed to set himself up as the rival of the man, who by 
splendid eloquence and spotless character now ruled the House of 
Commons, and who, with the exception of the Whigs (lamentably re- 
duced in numbers) was respected and supported by the whole nation, 

The Prime Minister had no desire to quarrel with the Chancellor, 
but was resolved to keep him under due subordination. For the present, 
therefore, he contented himself with submitting a good-humoured repre- 
sentation to the King, which, admitted the Chancellor’s abilities and 
services, but hinting at his waywardness, stated how desirable it was 
that there should be entire cordiality among the members of the 


454 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


[Nov. 1789.] cabinet. Py The King wrote to Thurlow on the subject, 

‘1 and received such an answer as led him confidently to 
hope that Mr, Pitt would have no reason to complain again on this 
subject.”* 

For two or three years the Government went on pretty smoothly, 
Thurlow, although discontented and sulky, abstaining from any public 
attack on the Government—but watching for an opportunity of showing 
his sense of the supposed ingratitude of the young man he pretended to 
have patronised and promoted. 

During this interval the Chancellor hardly ever spoke in Parliament. 
In the first session after the King’s recovery he did not once interfere 
for the Government, unless in repressing an irregular conversation 
commenced by Lord Stormont, about the treaty with Prussia ;f and he 
testified his contempt for the part taken by his colleagues in the other 
House, by throwing out, on the first reading, Mr. Beaufoy’s bill, which 
Mr, Pitt had sanctioned in the Commons for celebrating the centenary 
of the Revolution.t 

But (wonderful to relate!) he allowed to pass through the House 
without opposition a bill, remarkable as the first that passed, to mitigate 
the atrocious severity of our criminal code—enacting that women con- 
victed of high or petty treason, instead of being burned to death, as they 
had hitherto been, should be hanged. 

During the whole of the following session, he never opened his mouth, 


* Tomlin’s Life of Pitt, ii, 513. It would appear from the “ Rolliad,” that even 
before the King’s illness the public believed that Thurlow went on very uncom- 
fortably with the cabinet, and that there was a great desire to turn him out. In the 
“ JournaL of the Right Hon. Henry Dunpas” we have the following entry :— 
“ March 9th, 1788. Got Thurlow to dine with us at Wimbledon—gave him my 
best Burgundy and blasphemy, to put him into good humour. After a brace of 
bottles, ventured to drop a hint of business—Thurlow damned me, and asked Pitt 
for a sentiment [toast]. Pitt looked foolish—Grenville wise.” After.an account of 
the other members of the cabinet, he proceeds with the Chancellor.“ Thurlow very 
queer. He swore the bill [India Declaratory Bill, then pending in Parliament] is 
absurd, and a correspondence with those cursed directors damned stupid. However, 
will vote and speak with us.—Pitt quite sick of him—says ‘he growls at everything, 
proposes nothing, and supports everything.’ N.B. Must look out for a new Chan- 
cellor—Scott might do, but cants too much about his independence and his con- 
science—what the devil has he to do with independence and conscience ?—besides, 
he has a snivelling trick of retracting when he is caught in a lie—hate such puling 
fellows. Gzorce HarpincE not much better—must try him though—will order him 
to speak on Wednesday.”—Rolliad, 22d ed. p. 516. George Hardinge had not 
answered, for he died a Welsh Judge. 

t 28 Parl. Hist. 138. 

{ The motion (so unusual and so affronting to the House of Commons) for throw- 
ing out the bill in this stage being made by the Bishop of Bangor, was warmly sup- 
ported by the Lord Chancellor, and carried by a majority of 13 to 6.—28 Parl. Hist. 
296. The deliverance cf the nation from slavery and popery was celebrated in 
Scotland, without an act of Parliament, by the authority of the Church, when Dr. 
Robertson delivered the sermon in the hearing of Lord Brougham, then a boy—of 
which his Lordship has given us such an interesting account in the Life of his dis- 
tinguished kinsman.—Men of Letters, 270. 

§ See 4 Adolph. 484. 


LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 455 


‘ satiate 
id Mites Lord Hawkesbury’s complaint of having [Juxx 3, 1790.] 
een obstructed by the military when coming down to 
attend the service of the House. The Lord Chancellor took up the 
matter very warmly, insisting that, for such an insult, no apology could 
be accepted, and that their Lordships must, in justice to themselves, 
institute inquiries for the purpose of discovering and punishing the de- 
linquents.* 

Since the formation of the present Government, Thurlow had hitherto 
been considered its organ in the House of Lords; but Mr. Pitt declared, 
that he was never quite certain what part in the debate the Chancellor 
would take, and less quiet times being in prospect, he was very unhappy 
lest some important measure, on which depended his reputation and his 
stability, might be defeated, after being carried triumphantly through 
the House of Commons.t He therefore resolved, at the meeting of the 
new Parliament, in November 1790, to have in the House of Lords a 
new leader, in whom he could place confidence. The person proposed 
for this post was Mr. William Grenville, who had been Speaker of the 
House of Commons, and not giving satisfaction in that office had been 
taken into the Cabinet, and was giving striking proofs of his talents as 
a statesman.t The King unwittingly thinking that the arrangement 
would be agreeable to the Chancellor, by saving him trouble, at once 
consented to it, without consulting him, and Lord Grenville took his 
seat on the ministerial bench. Thurlow was deeply mortified, but 
having no plausible cause of quarrel, he for the present concealed his 
chagrin, Still he persuaded himself that he held the first place in the 
King’s favour, and he hoped that he might, ere long, be able to avenge 
himself of such a slight. ‘* His coolness and reserve towards Mr. Pitt 
increased, although there was no difference of opinion between them on 
any political question.”’§ 

For a season the Chancellor concealed his resentment, and he even 
had such a control over his feelings as to support Lord Grenville on 
the new leader’s first appearance in that character in the 
House. A discussion arose respecti , doubtful Agia (ded 

: pecting a very 
measure of Mr. Pitt, which he was soon obliged to abandon—the 
armament against Russia, on the taking of Ockzakow and Ismael. Lord 
Grenville moved the address of thanks in answer to a message from 
the Crown, announcing, that in consequence of his Majesty not having 
succeeded in bringing about a satisfactory adjustment of the differences 
between the Sublime Porte and the Empress Catherine, he deemed it 
necessary to increase his forces by sea and land. Earl Fitzwilliam 


* 28 Parl. Hist 874. 

+ The Marquis of Stafford, and other common friends, had repeatedly remonstrated 
with Thurlow respecting his demeanour to Pitt, but entirely without effect.— Tom- 
line’s Life of Pitt, ii. 513. 

} I have heard the late Lord Holland several times say, that considerable abilities 
are not well adapted to the chair of the House of Commons; for all the Speakers in 
his time had been pronounced “excellent,” except Lord GrenviLur, and he failed, 
although the only clever man among them. 

§ Tomline’s Life of Pitt, ii. 513, 


456 REIGN OF GEORGE ITI. 


having moved an amendment censuring the conduct of the Government, 
Lord Loughborough made a speech, memorable as containing one of 
the earliest expressions of opinion in Parliament on the French revolu- 
tion, which he still regarded with hope and with favour. Having ow 
; veighed bitterly against the general policy o 
AES ae pea Ministers, who see disposed een _ in- 
terfere with the concerns of foreign states all over the world, and par- 
ticularly condemned the threatened rupture with Russia, he highly 
eulogised the magnanimous declaration of the National Assembly of 
France, that ‘they would for ever avoid wars on speculative and 
theoretical points,’—which ought to have suggested to us a wiser and 
more elevated system than that which we were pursuing. He said, 
‘the revolution in France presents to us the means of reducing our 
establishments, of easing the people, and of securing to the nation, for 
a length of years, the blessings of peace. But instead of this, we ran- 
sack the most obscure corners of the earth for enemies, and wish to 
rush into hostilities against a great empire which is our natural ally, 
and the present enlightened sovereign of which feels for this country 
sentiments of unmixed respect and good will.” 

The Lord Chancellor, stimulated probably by personal rivalry and 
dislike, left the woolsack, and answered this speech in a very con- 
temptuous tone. He abstained from any general defence of Ministers, 
but he insisted that the objections to the proposed address were wholly 
frivolous, as the Crown was entitled to confidence on such an emergency, 
and no noble Lord, by agreeing to the address, was pledged to the 
wisdom of any measure which the responsible advisers of the Crown 
might consequently recommend. In putting a construction on our 
treaties with Russia and Prussia, he affected a modesty which I do not 
understand, saying that, ‘on subjects of state he begged to be under- 
stood as speaking with deference to statesmen.” However, somewhat 
to countenance the notion that he considered himself a mere lawyer, 
and no statesman, he argued that their Lordships should not look 
merely to the letter of their contract with foreign nations, but should 
put an equitable interpretation upon i ; giving as an illustration, that, 
although we only engaged to defend Prussia when attacked,—if we 
saw Russia surrounding Poland in a manner dangerous to the interests 
of Prussia, we were bound to interfere for the benefit of our ally. Lord 
Loughborough’s compliments to the French revolution he treated with 
the utmost scorn, asserting ‘‘ that the National Assembly had never 
assumed a bold or manly aspect, and that its proceedings were, in his 
mind, a tissue of political fopperies, as distant from true wisdom as 
from morality and honour.”’* 

There being now a new Parliament, the important constitutional 
question arose, whether Hastings’s impeachment was abated by the dis- 
solution of the House of Commons which had commenced it? All im- 
partial lawyers were of opinion that it was now to be considered as 


* 29 Parl. Hist. 45, 


LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 457 


pending zm statw quo; and after a committee appointed to search for 
precedents had made their report to this effect, Lord Porchester moved, 
‘that a message be sent to the Commons, to acquaint [May 16 
them that this House will proceed upon the trial of Warren . ‘J 
Hastings, Esquire.” 

This was strongly opposed by the Lord Chancellor, who contended 
that the prosecution was at an end with the prosecutors; that Mr. Hast- 
ings’s recognisance had expired, so that he, being neither in prison nor 
under bail, he was not subject to their jurisdiction ; and that all prece- 
dents were in his favour, as well as all reasoning. As to the report of the 
committee, he had read it with attention, and it seemed to him to be little 
short of demonstration, that, by the usage and law of that House, an im- 
peachment was universally understood to abate at a dis- [a. v. 1792,] 
solution.—Lord Loughborough, however, clearly proved 
that the impeachment, being “in the name of all the Commons of 
England,” was still to be carried on in their name by their present re- 
presentatives ; that the House of Lords is a permanent judicial tribunal, 
deciding in one Parliament appeals and writs of error brought before it 
in a preceding Parliament; that the assumption of the defendant’s re- 
cognisance being at an end was a mere begging of the question; that 
the precedents, when rightly understood, negatived the doctrine of 
abatement: and that to sanction the doctrine contended for, would be 
to put it in the power of the executive government at any time, by a 
dissolution of Parliament, to screen a delinquent minister from deserved 
punishment. Lord Grenville, and most of the government Peers, 
divided against the Chancellor, and he was beaten by a majority of 66 
to 18.* 

But he succeeded this session in defeating Mr. Fox’s Libel Bill un- 
der pretence that there was not time to consider the subject, although, 
to the high credit of Mr. Pitt, who had supported the bill in the Com- 
mons, Lord Grenville anxiously declared that ‘* he should be extremely 
sorry if it were to go forth to the world that the administration were 
against it, or unfriendly to the rights of juries.’”’t 

Thurlow’s official career was now drawing to a close. On the 31st 
of January, 1792, he, for the last time, delivered into the hands of the 
King, the speech to be read on the opening of Parliament. It is ex- 
tremely difficult to understand the wayward conduct during this session 
which led to his dismission. I have in vain tried to obtain a satisfactory 
explanation of it by studying contemporary memoirs, and consulting 
some venerable politicians whose memory goes back to this era. He 
had formed no connexion with the Whigs:—he was more than ever 
estranged from their society, and opposed to their principles,—and he 
could not have had the remotest intention of going over to them. I[ 
can only conjecture that, as Mr. Pitt’s reputation had been a little tar- 
nished by the failure of the Russian armament, and he had not yet 
been strengthened by the accession of the Duke of Portland, Burke, 


* 29 Parl, Hist. 514-545, + Ib, 726-741. 


458 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


and the alarmist Whigs, which soon followed,—Thurlow, still reckoning 
in a most overweening manner on his personal favour with the King, 
sincerely thought that he could displace the present Premier, whom he 
regarded as little better than a Whig, and that he could establish a real 
Tory government, either under himself, or some other leader, who 
would oppose the Libel Bill, and all such dangerous innovations, and 
rule the country on true old Church-and-King maxims, 

The occasion he selected for commencing hostilities was the intro- 
duction into the House of Lords of Mr. Pitt’s celebrated Bill ‘*' To esta- 
blish a Sinking Fund, for the redemption of the National Debt.” This 
measure, which has proved a failure, and which almost all financiers 
now condemn, was considered by its reputed author, his friends, and 
the bulk of the nation, as the greatest effort of his genius, and a lasting 
monument of his fame.* He staked upon it the stability of his admi- 
nistration, It passed the Commons with applause. But in the Lords, 
‘to the astonishment of every one, it was violently reprobated by the 
Lord Chancellor.” His colleagues must have been even more startled 
than the rest of mankind; for he had not offered the slightest objection 
when the measure was considered in the Cabinet, and when he left the 
woolsack to throw it out, he had not hinted to any of them an intention 
to say a word against it. In truth he had not discovered its fallacy, 
and he made no attempt to show that, by the creation of additional 
stock and additional taxation to supply the sinking fund, the aggregate 
amount of the national debt would be increased with diminished means 
of bearing the burden of it. He almost entirely confined himself to 
a rather futile objection, that an unconstitutional attempt was made to 
bind future Parliaments.. No one believed that future Parliaments 
could be bound to provide for the sinking fund, if they should think 
that the money to be raised had better be left to ‘/ructify in the 
pockets of the people ;” but the inability to insure a perpetual adherence 
to the plan could be no solid argument against attempting it; for, if 
sound and beneficial, there was every reason to expect that it would 
become more and more popular. But Thurlow believed that he had 
gained a complete triumph by thundering out most impressively and 
awfully, ‘ that the bill exhibited a degree of presumption and arrogance 
in dictating to future Parliaments, which he trusted the House would 
never countenance. None but a novice, a sycophant, a mere reptile 
of a minister, would allow this act to prevent him from doing what, in 
his own judgment, circumstances would require at the time; and a 
change in the situation of the country may render that which is proper 
at one time inapplicable at another.” He thus concluded,—* In short, 
the scheme is nugatory and impracticable—the inaptness of the project 
is equal to the vanity of the attempt.” Such observations were pro- 
bably better adapted to his audience than others more profound, and he 
had nearly succeeded in defeating the bill—which must have been fol- 


* The scheme was in fact Dr. Price’s, and was the worst of three which he sug- 
gested, t Tomline’s Life of Pitt, ii, 513. 


LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 459 


lowed by the retirement of Mr. Pitt. On the eobdena it was carried 
only by a majority of six.* 

Next morning Mr, Pitt wrote a letter to the King, the tenor of which 
we may pretty well guess at from the following letter, which he at the 
same time sent to the Lord Chancellor. 


“ Downing Street, Wednesday, May 16, 1792. 
“My Lord, 
se think it right to take the earliest opportunity of acquainting your 
Lordship, that being convinced of the impossibility of his Majesty’s 
service being any longer carried on to advantage while your Lordship 
and myself both remain in our present situations, I have felt it my duty 
to submit that opinion to his Majesty ; humbly requesting his Majesty’s 
determination thereupon. 
‘*¢T have the honour to be, &c. 
oS ML Pets 


The coming storm had been foreseen by several, and the result had 
been distinctly foretold by that sagacious statesman, Lord North, who 
a short time before had said to a person peculiarly intimate with Lord 
Thurlow, ‘ Your friend thinks that his personal influence with the King 
authorizes him to treat Mr. Pitt with humeur. Take my word for it, 
whenever Mr, Pitt says to the King, ‘Sir, the Great Seal must be in 
other hands,’ the King will take the Great Seal from Lord Thurlow, 
and never think any more about him.” And so it turned out. The 
King at once yielded to Mr. Pitt’s wishes, and caused an intimation to 
be conveyed to Lord Thurlow that “ His Majesty had no longer any 
occasion for his services,’ 

We are not informed of the channel through which the dismissal was 
announced to the Chancellor, but the act was a dreadful surprise to him, 
and the manner of it deeply wounded his pride. ‘I have no doubt,” 
writes the same person to whom Lord North had uttered his prophecy, 
“that this Conduct of the King was wholly unexpected by Lord Thur- 
low: it mortified him most severely. TI recollect his saying to me, ‘ No 
man has a right to treat another in the way in which the. King has 
treated me: we cannot meet again in the same room.’ ” 

However, as Mr. Pitt was not then provided with any successor ; as 
great inconvenience would have arisen from putting the Great Seal into 
commission during the sitting of Parliament, and it was desirable that 


* This very important debate is not even noticed in the Parliamentary History, 
and the only account we have of it is in a very wretched book, Tomline’s “ Life of 
Pitt.” See vol. ii, 513 ; Gifford’s Life of Pitt, iii, 187. 

+ Nich. Reeoll. 347. The author adds: “It is well known that for some years 
before Lord Thurlow was a second time deprived of the Great Seal he and Mr. Pitt 
had not lived on pleasant terms. I never could discover the cause of this. I recol- 
lect Lord Thurlow’s having once said to me—t When Mr. Pitt first became Prime 
Minister, it was a very unpleasant thing to do business with him ; but it afterwards 
became as pleasant to do business with him as with Lord North. > Lord Thurlow 
strongly disapproved of Mr. Pitt’s conduct on the impeachment of Mr. Hastings ; 
how far that contributed to excite ill-humour in him, I cannot say.” 


460 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


the present holder of it should continue in office a short time to give 
judgment in causes which had been argued before him, an arrangement 
was made that he should not surrender it till the day of the prorogation. 

Meanwhile, he tried to set the King against Mr. Pitt and the Govern- 
ment from which he was retiring, by his violent and somewhat artful 

[a. D. 1792.] opposition to a bill which they had introduced ‘ for en- 
ee ‘4 couraging the growth of timber in the New Forest.” 
This provided for the inclosure of some crown land to be planted with 
trees for the use of the navy, and suspended or mitigated the forestal 
rights of the Crown over a large district in Hampshire,—these rights — 
being of no practical value to the sovereign, and very injurious to the 
subject. The bill passed the Lower House with the praise of all parties. 
But when it stood for a second reading in the Lords, “ the Lord Chan- 
cellor objected to what he called the supposed principle of the bill, for 
he would not admit that it was founded on any read principle, as tending, 
under false pretences, to deprive the Crown of that landed property to 
which it was entitled by the constitutional law of the country. He 
maintained that it was of consequence that the King should have an 
interest in the land of the kingdom. He allowed the imperfection of the 
forest laws, but he insisted that the defects of this bill were infinitely 
more pernicious. In conclusion, he attacked the framers of the bill, 
his colleagues in office, in the most pointed and most unjustifiable manner. 
He openly charged them with having imposed upon their Sovereign, 
and did not scruple to assert that if the members of that House who 
were the hereditary councillors of the Crown did not interfere in oppo- 
sition to those who had advised this measure, a// was over.”* Never- 
theless the bill passed, and the resistance to it being explained to his 
Majesty to be merely an ebullition of spleen from him who had so long 
piqued himself on the appellation of * the King’s friend,” no alarm was 
excited in the royal bosom, and the resolution to dismiss him remained 
unaltered. 

Seeing his fate inevitable, instead of quietly submitting to it, he com- 
plained loudly of the ingratitude and faithlessness of Princes. But, even 
without regarding the double part which Thurlow had acted respecting 
the regency, all must agree that George III. could not properly have 
hesitated in taking part with Mr. Pitt in this controversy. The wanton 
desertion of those who had claims upon him by their services could not 
justly be imputed to this monarch during any part of his reign. 

Before the conclusion of the session important debates 

[a. Dp. 1792.] . ob a) 

place on two measures, which the Government very 

cordially and creditably supported, and both of these were opposed by 
the Chancellor. Resolutions came up from the Commons for the aboli- 
tion of the slave trade, and Lord Grenville having contended ‘ that, for 
the sake of preserving the national character from disgrace, it ought to 
be abolished, not only as a traffic founded on inhumanity and injustice, 
but a traffic unnecessary and impolitic,” Lord Thurlow said, ‘ As to 


* Gifford’s Life of Mr. Pitt, iii. 187; Moore’s Life of Sheridan, ii. 273. 


LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 461 


the iniquity and atrocity which had been so largely imputed to the slave 
trade, he could not understand why its criminality had not been discovered 
by our ancestors, and should become so conspicuous in the year 1792,” 
Then, forgetting his former contempt for colonial legislation, which he had 
testified during the contest with America, he suggested that the importa- 
tion of slaves from Africa into the West India islands was a subject of 
internal commercial regulation, which the planters themselves best under- 
stood, and which should be left to their decision. ‘This being considered 
an open question,—on the division which took place, he carried a ma- 
jority of 63 to 86 against the Government.* 

But, luckily, he failed in his dying effort as Chancellor, again to defeat 
the bill to ascertain the rights of juries on trials for libel, and to protect 
the liberty of the press. He first contrived to get it postponed till near 
the end of the session ; in every stage he inveighed violently againt it 5 
he obtained a declaration of opinion from the Judges, that “ libel, or no 
libel?” was a pure question of law for the Court; and, thoroughly 
beaten by Lord Camden, he proposed a clause which would have ren- 
dered the bill nugatory, and to which he pretended that the venerable 
patriot could not object,—when he received a memorable answer, which 
seems actually to have made him ashamed, as he offered no farther oppo- 
sition to the bill. However, when it had passed, he embodied his ob- 
jections to it in a strong protest, which remains as a monu- [Jun 12 
ment of his illiberality and his obstinacy.f A 

Three days after this protest was signed, he ceased to be Chancellor. 
The 15th of June, 1792, must have been a sad day for the haughty 
spirit of Thurlow. 

Now came the prorogation, the event to which his dismissal was 
respited. The King being placed on the throne, and the Commons 
attending at the bar of the House of Lords, the Speaker, in his address, 
before presenting the Supply Bill for the royal assent, eulogised in warm 
terms the measures of the Session—particularly that for establishing a 
sinking fund to pay off the national debt, and that for ascertaining the 
rights of juries and protecting the liberty of the press. Nay, in the very 
speech which the King himself delivered from the throne, and which 
Thurlow, on bended knees, put into the King’s hand, his Majesty was 
made to say, ‘I have observed, with the utmost satisfaction, that you 
have made provision for the reduction of the present national debt, and 
established a permanent system for preventing the dangerous accumu- 
lation of debt in future,”—although it was the scheme which the “ keeper 
of the royal conscience” had so violently opposed, and for opposing 
which he had received notice to quit his office. The last time he ever 
spoke in public as Chancellor was in proroguing the Parliament, by his 
Majesty’s command, till the 30th day of August then next.f 

As soon as this ceremony had been performed, 
he drove to St. James’s paldee where a Sone was LON 1), aed 
held, and he surrendered the Great Seal to his Majesty,—having the 


* 29 Parl. Hist. 1241-1355, t Ante, p. 277. t 29 Parl. Hist. 1555, 


462 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


mortification to see Sir James Eyre, Chief Baron of the Exchequer, Sir 
William Ashurst, a Judge of the King’s Bench, and Sir John Wilson, a 
Judge of the Common Pleas, in attendance to receive it as Lords Com- 
missioners. Resignation of office into the hands of the Sovereign by a 
ministry retiring in a body, though not a joyous scene, is attended with 
some consolations, ‘They probably feel, in common, that they have 
fought a good fight; they know that-the same fate has overtaken all; 
and their misfortune is not only softened by mutual sympathy, but by 


the prospect of going together into opposition, and of returning together . 


into place. Poor Thurlow was now a solitary outcast ; he had brought 
his disgrace upon himself by his own waywardness and intemperance ; 
he had no question to agitate before the public; he had no political party 
to associate with; he had lost the pleasures of office, without the excite- 
. ment of opposition; and hope even was gone, for there was no con- 
ceivable turn of parties that could ever again bring power within his 
reach. When he drove him from St. James’s to Great Ormond Street 
without the Great Seal, which had been his beloved companion so many 
years, he must have been a good deal dejected.—T he only boon bestowed 
upon him was a remainder of his peerage to the sons of his two bro- 
thers,*—and no ray of kingly favour ever after shone upon him for the 
rest of his days, . 

He soon comported himself, however, with apparent firmness, and he 
showed a friendly and generous disposition by the advice he now gave 
to Sir John Scott, the Attorney-General, who having been advanced by 
him, wished to share his fall. “Stick by Pitt,” said the retiring Chan- 
cellor: ‘he has tripped up my heels, and I would have tripped up his 
if I could. I confess I never thought the King would have parted with 
me so easily. My course is run, and for the future I shall remain neu- 
tral. But you must on no account resign: I will not listen for a mo- 
ment to such an idea. We should be looked on as a couple of fools! 
Your promotion is certain, and it shall not be baulked by any such 
whimsical proceeding.” It is creditable to both, that in the party vicis- 
situdes which followed, their intimacy and cordiality remained unabated, 


CHAPTER CLXI. 
CONCLUSION OF THE LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 


Our Ex-chancellor was at this time only sixty years of age, with an 
unbroken constitution. Considering his abilities and reputation, he 
might, as an independent member of the legislature, have had great 
weight, and he might have continued to fill a considerable space in the 


* On the 12th of June, 1792, he was created Baron Thurlow of Thurlow, in the 
county of Suffolk, with remainder, on failure of his own heirs male, to the heirs 
male of his brother the Bishop, and John Thurlow, Esq. 


LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 463 


public eye—being of some service to his country, and laying the founda- 
tion of some additional claim to the respect of posterity. But with his 
office he seemed to have lost all his energy. When he again entered the 
House of Lords, he was like a dethroned sovereign, and he could not 
bear his diminished consequence. . Seen without his robes, without his 
great wig, sitting obscurely on a back bench instead of frowning over 
the assembly from the woolsack,—the Peers were astonished to discover 
that he was an ordinary mortal, and were inclined to revenge themselves 
for his former arrogance by treating him with neglect. Finding his al- 
tered position so painful, he rarely took any part in the business of the 
House, and he might almost be considered as having retired from public 
life. He had a very favourable opportunity of improving our institu- 
tions and correcting the abuses in the law, which he had observed in his 
long experience, but he would as soon have thought of bringing in bills 
to alter the planetary system, or to soften the severity of the climate ; 
for he either thought what was established perfect, or that the evils ex- 
perienced in the administration of justice were necessary, and ought to 
be borne without murmuring, Almost the only subject which excited 
him was the attempt to abolish the slave trade, —‘‘a dangerous senti- 
mentality,” which he continued to resist and to reprobate. 

He now spent the greatest part of his time ata villa he had purchased 
near Dulwich.. The taste which, in early life, he had contracted for 
classical literature, proved during some months a resource to him. But 
reading without any definite object, he found tiresome, and he is said to 
have suffered much from the ¢ediwm vite. His principal 1793 
relief was in getting young lawyers to come to him in be i 
the evening to tell him what had been going on in the Court of Chan- 
cery in the morning; and he was in the habit of censuring very freely 
the decisions of his successors.* 

For about two years he pretty regularly attended the hearing of ap- 
peals and writs of error in the House of Lords, but at the end of that 
period he refused to come any longer. Having no pension or retired 
allowance, he did not consider that the public had any claim upon his 
time ;} he could not well endure to appear as a subordinate where he 
had so long dictated; and as there was no reasonable prospect of his 
return to office, he was indifferent about keeping up his law by acting 
asa Judge. In January, 1793, his mortification was increased by see- 
ing the Great Seal in the possession of his rival Wedderburn, on the 
secession of a large section of the Whig party from Mr. Fox—an event 
to which Thurlow’s own retirement had materially contributed. 

When he showed himself in the House, he was observed to look 
sulky and discontented. He was even at a loss where to seat himself, 


* Mr. Leach, afterwards Sir John, and Master of the Rolls, was his chief reporter. 
It is curious that Mr. James Allan Park, afterwards a Judge, acted in the same 
capacity to Lord Mansfield when retired from the Court of King’s Bench. 

t Although there was then no parliamentary retired allowance for Ex-chancellors, 
they were better off than at present. Thurlow was a Teller of the Exchequer, and 
had given sivecures to all his relations, for one of which his nephew now receives a 
commutation of 90001. a year. 


464 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


for he hated equally the government and the opposition, and there was 
no precedent for an Ex-chancellor placing himself on a cross bench. 
He took no part in the important debates which arose on the French 
revolution, or on the origin of the war with the French Republic. In 
the session of 1793 he contented himself with opposing a bill to increase 
the sum for which a debtor might be arrested from 102. to 20/.,* and 
expressing an opinion that there is no appeal in criminal cases from the 
Courts in Scotland to the House of Lords.t In the beginning of the 

following year he resisted the attempt that was made to 

[Jan, 1794] “9°. Sea ; 

obtain a reversal of the atrocious sentence of transporta- 
tion passed by the Court of Justiciary, at Edinburgh, on Muir, for ad- 
vocating Parliamentary reform.t 

Out of office he continued a warm partisan of Mr. Hastings, although 
he could hardly have expected that the aged and vituperated Ex-Go- 
vernor-General could now be set up as a rival to Mr, Pitt. 

Thurlow’s zeal in defeating the impeachment was heightened by his 

antipathy to Burke, with whom he continued from time 
[May, 1794.] sie; Preis: fe shag 

o time to have “passages of arms.” A committee of 
the House of Commons appointed to inquire into the causes of the 
length of the trial, having presented an elaborate Report drawn by the 
chief manager, which reflected with great severity upon the manner in 
which the Lords had conducted the proceedings, and particularly their 
practice of deciding all questions upon the admissibility of evidence ac- 
cording to the rules of the common law as declared by the Judges, the 
Ex-chancellor loudly complained of it as a libel on the House of Lords, 
denominating it ‘a scurrilous pamphlet, published by one Debrett in 
Piccadilly,” — which had that day been put into his hands, reflecting 
highly upon the Judges and many members of that House. He said 
‘*it was indecent and disgraceful, and such as ought not to pass un- 
punished, as it vilified and misrepresented the conduct of judges and 
magistrates intrusted with the administration of criminal justice, — an 
offence of a very heinous nature, — tending with the ignorant and the 
wicked to lessen the respect due to the law itself.” 

We have a fuller account of Burke’s retaliation next day in the 
House of Commons. After stating the attack made on ‘the pamphlet 
published by one Debrett in Piccadilly,” he said,—* I think it impossi- 
ble, combining all the circumstances, not to suppose that this speech 
does reflect upon a Report, which, by order of the Committee on which 


* 30 Parl. Hist, 650. t Ib, 928, 

} 20 Parl. Hist. 1302, 1304. The trials which took place in Scotland about that 
time cannot now be read without amazement and horror,—mixed with praises to 
Heaven that we live in better times. In the year 1834, being a candidate to repre- 
sent the city of Edinburgh in Parliament, I was reproached for not being sufficiently 
liberal in my opinions. I said truly, that although Attorney-General to the Crown, 
I had uttered sentiments for which, forty years before, I should have been sent to 
Botany Bay. “The Martyrs’ Monument,” on the Calton Hill, erected to the 
memory of Muir and his companions, is a striking proof of the servitude of a former 
generation, and of the freedom of the present. 

§ 31 Parl. Hist, 288. 


—_—— 





LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 465 


I served, I had the honour to present to this House. For any thing im- 
proper in that Report, and the other members of the Committee are 
responsible to this House, and to this House only. I am of opinion with 
the eminent person by whom that Report is censured, that it is neces- 
sary at this time very particularly to preserve the authority of the 
Judges. But the Report does not accuse the Judges of ignorance or 
corruption. Whatever it says, it does not say calumniously. This kind 
of language belongs'to those whose eloquence entitles them to a free 
use of epithets. It is necessary to preserve the respect due to the House 
of Lords; it is full as necessary to preserve the respect due to the 
House of Commons; upon which (whatever may be thought of us by 
some persons) the weight and force of all authorities within this king- 
dom essentially depend. The Report states grave cause of complaint 
to the prejudice of those whom we represent. Our positions we sup- 
port by reason and precedent, and no sentiment which we have ex- 
pressed am I disposed to retract or to soften. Whenever an occasion 
shall be regularly given for discussing the merits of the Report, I shall 
be ready in its defence to meet the proudest name for ability, learning, 
or reputation which this kingdom can send forth.”* 

Thurlow remained quiet till the trial was at last to close, and the 
arraignment having taken place before one generation, 
the judgment was to be pronounced by anwehay One LAREEts LA 2s] 
hundred and sixty Peers had walked in the procession the first day, and 
only twenty-nine voted on the question of guzlty or not guilty. ‘The 
Great Seal was borne before Loughborough, who, when the trial com- 
menced, was a fierce opponent of Mr. Pitt’s government, while Thur- 
low, who presided in the Court when it first sat, estranged from his old 
allies, sat scowling among the junior Barons, + 

But when the debates upon the merits began among the Lords them- 
selves, in their own chamber, the Ex-chancellor’s pugnacity returned 
in full vigour, and he valiantly assailed his successor, who formerly, 
and still, closely connected by party ties with Mr. Burke, contended 
that all the charges, except three, were fully established. Thurlow 
treated all these arguments with contempt, and insisted that even the 
charges on which six Peers said ‘‘Gwuzlty,” were either entirely frivo- 
lous, or unsupported by a shred of evidence. He had, on this occasion, 
not only the majority of the House, but the voice of the public on his 
side, there having been, for some time, a strong reaction against the 
accusation ; and he must have enjoyed a great triumph in being present 
while Lord Loughborough was compelled to announce the acquittal, 
and to behold the triumphant Hastings, still standing at the bar, over- 
whelmed with congratulations. +t 

The vulgar, who do not penetrate the workings of the human heart, 
were astonished now to discover that Thurlow, who had been a furious 
Ultra-tory, was beginning to incline to the liberal side in politics, He 


* 31 Parl. Hist. 605-609. Pn 0 + Macaulay’s Essays, iii. 456. 
t Trial of Warren Hastings, published by Debrett, 1797; Mills’s History of 
India, vol. v. c. 2. 


VOL. V. 30 


466 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


was taken into favour by the Prince of Wales; he formed an intimacy 
with Lord Moira, a leader of the Carlton House party, and he was even 
disposed to cultivate the acquaintance of Mr. Fox. There is nothing so 
effectual to reconcile old political, and even personal, enmities as.a com- 
mon hatred of the Minister for the time being. “ Idem sentire de rerum 
politicarum administro,” is the foundation of English, as ‘idem sentire 
de republicé ” was of Roman, friendships. Low as the Whig party now 
was in point of numbers, from the dread of Jacobinism,*—Thurlow 
showed strong symptoms of a wish to coalesce with them. He assisted 
Lord Lauderdale in opposing the suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act, 
although, during the American war, he scorned all who had any scruple 
about such unconstitutional measures, and he divided against the Go- 
vernment in a minority of 11 to 119.t 

To strengthen his connexion with Carlton House, when the bill was pass- 
ing to grant the Prince an annuity on his inauspicious marriage, Thur- 
low expressed deep regret that a larger allowance was not proposed for 
his Royal Highness. He anticipated much good conduct both from the 
Prince and the Princess, and he prophesied “that, when the new order 
of things was observed, the generosity of the nation would be roused 
by the change, and they would readily come forward and relieve the 
Prince from the necessity of longer continuing in retirement and ob- 
security.” The Duke of Clarence highly complimented the noble and 
learned Lord on the regard and attachment he had manifested for the 
Prince and the Royal Family.t 

Thurlow now became a “flaming patriot.” We have arrived ata 
period of English history which, by exaggeration, has been called ‘ the 
Reign of Terror,” and upon which I shall often have to animadvert in 
writing the lives of Loughborough, Erskine, and Eldon. Under the ap- 
prehension of revolutionary principles,—without any intention of per- 
manently encroaching upon the constitution, but with the hope of adding 
to the strength of the administration, by spreading alarm over the 
nation,—after the failure of the ill-advised trials, in which an attempt 
was made to take the lives of Mr. Horne Tooke, and others, for follow- 
ing the example lately set by the Prime Minister in struggling for Par- 
liamentary reform,—bills were brought in of a very stringent character— 
to restrain the holding of public meetings,—to extend the law of high 
treason,—and to subject persons found guilty of seditious libels to trans- 
portation beyond the seas. 

These having been strenuously resisted by Fox, Grey, and Erskine 
[Drc. 1795 ] in the House of Commons—when they reached the House 

4 ‘4 of Lords they found a bold opponent in Ex-chancellor 

Thurlow. He asked, “ was it fitting that a man should be subject to 
such penalties for saying it was an abuse that twenty acres of land be- 


* I heard old George Byng say, at the dinner given to him to celebrate the 50th 
anniversary of his having sat for Middlesex, alluding to those times: “It has been 
asserted that the Whigs would all have been held in one hackney coach. This is a 
calumny ; we should have filled two /” ; 

+ 31 Parl. Hist. 586. } 32 Parl. Hist. 124-139, 





LIFE. OF LORD THURLOW. 467 


low Old Sarum Hill, without any inhabitants, should send two represen- 
tatives to Parliament? All were to be punished who attempted to create 
a dislike to the established constitution ; and of the established consti- 
tution this renowned rotten borough is a part. He was decidedly of 
opinion that the old constitutional Jaws of the country were quite sufh- 
cient to put down offences against the state. New statutes and severe 
penalties he thought little calculated to attain the object proposed. A 
jury would be inclined to acquit a mischievous libeller rather than ex- 
pose him to, be transported seven years to Botany Bay. Cruel laws 
never conduced to the safety of a Prince or the preservation of an 
established government.”’* On another occasion he said, ‘ he would 
have the existing law improved against libellous and seditious meet- 
ings,—which he had no doubt might thus be put an end to. The 
speeches quoted were insolent and impertinent, but were they so dange- 
rous as to call for the proposed enactments? It was the glory of the 
English constitution that it imposed no previous restraint on the people 
in the exercise of the important privilege of meeting to discuss griev- 
ances and petition Parliament for their redress. That privilege stood 
precisely on the same ground with the freedom of the press. Its use 
was free and unrestrained, but its abuse was open to punishment. Mon- 
tesquieu, in his ‘Spirit of Laws,’ said that ‘the existence of political 
freedom in England depends on the unrestrained right of printing.’ . If 
the people feel the pressure of grievances, and may not complain of 
them, we are slaves indeed. ‘To declare, therefore, that ‘ the people have 
nothing to do with the laws but to obey them,’ was as fallacious as it 
was odious.t ‘There was no ground for saying, that if people met to 
discuss public questions, they meant to overcome the legislature; they 
might wish to awaken in the people a due attention to a subject involving 
their dearest and most invaluable rights. During the fervour of the 
Middlesex election, some had gone so far as to declare that no resolu- 
tion or act of the House of Commons was of any validity while Mr. 
Wilkes was excluded. Subsequently other doctrines had been broached 
equally extravagant and alarming, but he had never heard that bills, 
such as the present, were necessary to restrain them. This bill about 
public meetings was likewise liable to the gravest objection from the 
wording of its clauses, and either betrayed great negligence in those 
who framed it, or afforded suspicion of its originating in an awkward 
motive. ‘The bill gave magistrates the power of taking all persons into 
custody ‘who should hold any discourse for the purpose of inciting. or 
stirring up the people to hatred and contempt of the person of his 
Majesty, or the government and constitution of this realm as by law 
established.’ If these words were allowed to stand in the bill, there 
was at once an end of all discussion with a view to Parliamentary re- 


* 32 Parl. Hist; 255. 

+ Sentiment of the Bishop of Rochester, which we are told Thurlow violently re- 
probated when it was uttered, although this does not appear from the Parliamentary 
History. ‘The Bishop was now allowed to explain the expression so as to render it 
unexceptionable, 


468 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


form. The inequality between Yorkshire and Old Sarum—each return- 
ing its two members—could not be mentioned without derision and 
ridicule,—which an ignorant magistrate would construe into an incite- 
ment of the people to hatred and contempt of our representative system, 
and consequently of ‘the government and constitution as by law estab- 
lished.’ ‘The worthy magistrate would dissolve the meeting, and take 
all present into custody. A prosecution might be brought for excess of 
authority, but the prosecutor would come into court with a rope about 
his neck, To such an extent did the bill go as to enact by one clause 
that ‘if an assembly met for public discussion, should continue together 
peaceably to the number of twelve one hour after proclamation to depart, 
all present were guilty of felony,’ and the magistrate was ordered to put 
them to death, or at least was saved harmless, if they lost their lives in 
resisting him. The bill was founded on what was called the growth of 
French principles in this kingdom. ‘To produce*such outrages as had 
disgraced France, nothing could more directly tend than violent mea- 
sures like the present. He could not give his assent to a bill wantonly 
circumscribing that liberty which England had so long enjoyed, and 
under the auspicious influence of which she had so long flourished.” 
Upon a division, the minority mustered 18 against 107.* 

Having failed in these endeavours, the Ex-chancellor followed the 
example of the Whig leaders, without forming any express coalition 
with them,—in seceding from Parliament,—and during the two fol- 
lowing sessions his name does not once occur in the Parliamentary 
debates. 

However, in the autumn of 1797 there was suddenly a prospect 

which, while it lasted, gave him great delight) of 

yet on eaiiebss ie being restored to his old office of Lord Chan- 
cellor. Mr. Pitt’s administration had fallen into very considerable dis- 
credit from the conquests of the French Republic on the Continent, from 
the disturbed state of Ireland, from the mutiny in the fleet, and from 
the unexampled commercial embarrassment which had led to the sus- 
pension of cash payments at the Bank. But Mr. Fox, hated by the 
King, was at present by no means popular with the nation. In these 
circumstances, a project was set on foot under the auspices of the Prince 
of Wales, to form a new administration, from which Mr. Pitt and Mr. 
Fox should both be excluded, and of which the Earl of Moira was to be 
the head, with Thurlow as his Lord Chancellor, and Sir William Pul- 

* 32 Parl. Hist. 505-556. The Earl of Malmesbury gives the following account 
of this debate in a letter to the Duke of York: ‘“* The debate in the House of Lords 
began at five, and did not end till a quarter past three. The speakers against the 
bill (and usually in opposition) were those your Royal Highness mentioned in your | 
last letter, Lord Thurlow was artfully and cautiously factious; Lord Moira (I am 
very sorry to say) loudly and violently so; and I think I never heard a speech with 
so much unfair and unprovoked invective against ministers, It was evident to me, 
from the manner of these new partisans of the opposition, and from the part they 
had allotted to themselves on this occasion, that they have it in their expectations 
that the present ministry will not last; that Fox and his party will not be chosen to 


succeed them; and that they shall be the persons to fill their offices.” —Correspon. 
dence of Lord Malmesbury, ili. 256. 





LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 469 


teney as his Chancellor of the Exchequer. The King, [Duc. 1795.] 
although never disheartened in the midst of difficulties, fl . 
began to look at his minister with some distrust, and was not unfriendly 
to the change. But no confidence was placed in the sufficiency of the 
supposed new chief,—Mr. Sheridan absolutely refused to belong to an 
administration excluding Mr, Fox,—and the plan, without making more 
progress, proved abortive.* 

Thurlow seeing the man whom he so much disliked again in the 
possession of undisputed power, not only abstained from taking part in 
the debates of the House of Lords, but ceased to feel any interest what- 
ever in politics, and declared that he had finally abandoned Parlia- 
mentary strife. He never went to the King’s court, but he kept up an 
intercourse of civility with Carlton House. On rare occasions he 
showed himself among the Peers, and expressed an opinion on subjects 
not connected with faction. In the year 1798, he delivered a very 
sensible and dispassionate speech against a bill for increasing the as- 
sessed taxes,—not, in his old style, declaring ‘its principle to be in- 
iquitous, and its clauses nonsensical and contradictory,” but calmly ex- 
amining the different ways and proportions in which individuals should 
be made to contribute to the necessities of the State—so as to lead to 
the conclusion that he had been devoting a portion of his leisure to the 
study of finance and political economy. 7 

The following year he interposed with great effect to support the 
equality and dignity of the peerage—advantageously reminding those 
se heard him of his lip) he iS the Duke of [Juny 5, 1799.] 

ichmond, soon after his first entrance into the House. 

The Duke of Clarence (afterwards William IV.) having delivered a long 
speech against the abolition of the Slave trade, Lord Grenville rising 
after him, said, ‘‘ between him and his Royal Highness there could be 
no personal debate, because between them there was no equality.” 
Lord Romney having spoken to order, and Lord Grenville having re- 
peated his words, Lord Thurlow rolled out these sentences with all his 
ancient energy, graced with a suavity which was new to him: ‘I wish 
it to be clearly understood ‘ whether it is the constitution of this House 
that we are unequal in our right to speak here?’ I am one of the 
lowest in point of rank. | contend not for superiority of talent or for 
any pretension whatever above any of your Lordships. But, my Lords, 
I claim to be exactly equal not only to the illustrious personage who 
has just spoken, but to the Prince of Wales himself, if he were present 
in this House, as a Peer of Parliament. I know of no difference 
between Peers of Parliament, considered in their Parliamentary cha- 
racter, and [ maintain that the lowest, in point of precedence, while 
we are debating here, is equal to the highest. If rank or talent created 
an inequality in our right to speak in this House, the illustrious Prince 


* A rumour being spread that Mr. Sheridan had agreed to acccpt office under this 
projected administration, Lord Moira wrote a letter, which was published in the 
newspapers, to contradict it. See Moore’s Life of Sheridan, ii. 273, 302. 

+ 33 Parl. Hist. 1290. 


470 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


who has lately addressed you, would have a far higher right to be heard 
than I pretend to; but in speaking my sentiments to your Lordships, I 
claim for my humble self a perfect equality with every Prince of the 
blood, and with those of the highest intellectual position in this assem- 
bly.” He afterwards closed the debate by a violent attack on the bill, 
unnecessarily ridiculing what a Bishop had said, who had tried to prove 
the morality of the Africans, by “their women wearing petticoats,”— 
an article of dress which another Right Reverend Prelate asserted had 
been laid aside by the opera dancers, Thurlow then went on boldly to 
maintain ‘ that there was no prohibition against slavery in the Chris- 
tian religion, and that as we did not pretend to destroy the status, there 
was no propriety in putting down the ancient commerce by which slaves 
were to be supplied where they were wanted. The bill was altogether 
miserable, and contemptible. A Society had sprung up to civilise the 
Africans ; that is tosay, they would send a missionary to preach in a barn 
at Sierra Leone to a set of negroes who did not understand one word of 
his language.”—However, we ought never to despair of truth gradually 
and finally prevailing among any set of men, however prejudiced: the 
Lords were improving, and there being now an equality of votes on 
each side (36 to 36), the bill was only lost by the miaxim of this. House, 
“< semper presumitur pro negante’—which sometimes makes their de- 
cisions depend upon the manner in which the question is worded.* 

Lord Thurlow did not again appear in public till the 20th of May, 
1801, the occasion on which I myself saw and heard bim, and of which 
I have imperfectly attempted to give some account at the commence- 
ment of this memoir.t 

He had then the consolation of seeing Mr. Pitt obliged to retire into 
a private station, and the woolsack occupied by one much less obnoxious 
to him than his ancient rival: Mr. Addington was Prime Minister, and 
Lord Eldon was Chancellor. Thurlow’s spirits so far rallied, that he 
spoke several times with animation and efficiency. He opposed a bill 
to indemnify the late administration for what they had done during the 
suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act. He said, ‘instead of a bell of 
indemnity, it ought to be-entitled a bill to suppress actions for personal 
injuries. He could not see on what ground of policy a man should be 
imprisoned for eight years without being brought to trial. It was im- 
possible for him to withhold his compassion from persons lingering in 
prison for a series of years, who had again and again waited investiga- 
tion of their conduct ; nor could he resist the inclination to deem such 
men innocent until tried and convicted.” 

His next effort was in favour of an old enemy whom, when Attorney- 
General, he had prosecuted and sent to jail, and struggled to place in 


* 34 Parl. Hist. 1092-1141. As every Peer votes upon a division, and no one has 
a casting vote, some rule becomes necessary to govern the decision in case of an 
equality of voters. The one adopted is supposed to stop any proceeding not sanc- 
tioned by a majority. 

t Ante, p. 365. t 35 Parl. Hist. 1539. 


LIFE OF LORD THURLOW, 471 


the pillory, but with whom he was now living on terms of great per- 
sonal intimacy. 

The following extract from the Diary of a distinguished political cha- 
racter, some years deceased, gives an interesting account of their first 
meeting after the convicted parson had been marched off to Newgate :— 

‘“* Lady Oxford who then (1801) had a house at Ealing, had by 
Lord Thurlow’s desire (I believe), but at all events with his acquiescence, 
invited Horne Tooke to dinner to meet him. Lord Thurlow never 
having seen him since he had prosecuted him when Attorney-General 
for a libel in 1778, and when the greatest bitterness was shown on 
both sides—so that this dinner was.a meeting of great curiosity to us 
who were invited to it. Sheridan and Mrs. Sheridan were there, the 
late Lord Camelford, Sir Francis Burdett, Charles Warren, with several 
others, and myself.—Tooke evidently came forward for a display, and 
as I had met him repeatedly, and considered his powers of conversation 
as surpassing those of any person I had ever seen (in point of skill and 
dexterity, and if at all necessary in dyeng), so I took for granted old 
grumbling Thurlow would be obliged to lower his top-sail to him—but 
it seemed as if the very look and voice of Thurlow scared him out of 
his senses from the first moment—and certainly nothing could be much 
more formidable. So ‘Tooke tried to recruit himself by wine, and, 
though not generally a drinker, was very drunk: but all would not do; 
he was perpetually trying to distinguish himself, and Thurlow as con- 
stantly laughing at him.” 

Horne Tooke, after he had escaped the greater peril to which he had 
been exposed by another Attorney-General of being hanged, beheaded, 
and quartered as a traitor, had taken up his abode at Wimbledon, and 
thither Thurlow used to ride from Dulwich, that he might pass a morn- 
ing with him in talking over the trial of Rez v. Horne before Lord 
Mansfield, and in discussing some of the questions started in the Ewsa 
arspoevea.* ‘The Ex-chancellor would likewise occasionally dine with 
the ex-parson, and mix with good humour in the motley company there 
assembled,—Hardy, the shoemaker, sitting on one side of him, and Sir 
Francis Burdett on the other. 

Horne Tooke, though unsuccessful as a candidate against Mr, Fox at 
Westminster, had recently been returned to Parliament for Old Sarum 
by Lord Camelford ; and a question having arisen whether, as a priest 
in orders, he was disqualified to sit in the House of Commons, a bill 
passed that House to declare and enact that in all future parliaments, 
no person who had been ordained a priest should be allowed to serve as 
a representative of the people. When this bill stood for second reading 
in the House of Lords, Lord Thurlow violently opposed it. He began 
with the doctrine he had been used to propound in Wilkes’s case, re- 


* I have been informed by my late valued friend, Mr. Philip Courtenay, who, 
when a boy, used to be much with Horne Tooke at Wimbledon, that two or three 
years after this a new edition of the “ Diversions of Purley” passing through the 
press, Thurlow asked and obtained a sight of the proof sheets—saying, “he was 
afraid he should not live till the book was published.” 


472 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


specting the Middlesex election, expressing his astonishment “ that the 
Commons, who indubitably were the only judges of the question of 
‘who ought to sit in thetr House, should, on this occasion, voluntarily 
corisent to forego the exercise of functions peculiarly their own, and 
send up a bill to their Lordships upon the subject of eligibility to a seat 
among them,—calling thereby upon another branch of the legislature 
to regulate their rights and privileges.” He then expressed a desire to 
know who could be the author of such a bill, and took an opportunity 
of showing unabated ill-will to Mr. Pitt, by an invidious eulogy on his 
successor. ‘‘At the head of the government,” he said, ‘‘ was now 
placed a man of great respectability, of known integrity, of unassuming 
manners, ot seeking to engross all the power of the state into his own 
hands,—who had discharged the arduous duties of his office much to 
his own credit, and to the entire satisfaction of the public; it was im- 
possible that such a man should be so prodigal of his reputation as to 
propose such an absurd measure. . The eligibility of a priest who had 
been ordained should be decided by a committee under the Grenville 
act. Where was the propriety of introducing a bill to declare that a 
particular class of persons are ineligible by the common law to sit in 
Parliament? It seemed very hard that a person once ordained, who, 
from conscientious motives, ceased to exercise any clerical function, 
should be told that he must not enter any other profession, because his 
priestly character was indelible. But why should this indelible cha- 
racter disqualify a priest to sit in the one House more than in the other? 
The right reverend bench opposite were very short-sighted if they sup- 
ported this bill, for it would speedily lead to the revival of the act for 
their expulsion from Parliament.” He concluded by expressing his 
high value for the franchise of being eligible to represent the people 
in the legislature, which he considered as wantonly violated by this 
bill. However, he met with no support,—the present Lord Chancellor, 
the late Lord Chancellor, become Earl of Rosslyn, and the Bishop of 
Rochester standing up for the indelibility of orders, and considering 
this to be a permanent disqualification to represent the people in Parlia- 
ment ; so that he did not venture on a division, and he allowed the bill 
to pass without further opposition.* 
Lord Thurlow’s last recorded appearance in the House of Lords was 
[May 4, 1802.] . the debate on the peace of Amiens, when still dis- 
playing his love for Addington, or rather his unap- 
peasable enmity to Pitt,—in answer to Lord Grenville, who had com- 
plained that former treaties with France had not been renewed, he said 
‘‘ that all subsisting treaties being at an end by hostilities, the abrogation 
of these treaties was to be imputed to the government, which had plunged 
the country into the war, and that the revival of treaties depended on 
the will of the contracting parties.” This defence, however, was dis- 
claimed by Lord Chancellor Eldon, who denied the position that all 
former treaties not expressly renewed were to be considered abrogated, 


* 35 Parl. Hist. 1541. 


LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 473 


and declared that if the consequence of the omission were such as had 
been supposed, an address should be voted to his Majesty to dismiss his 
present Ministers from his councils for ever.* 

Disgusted by such a repudiation of his help, or conscious of decaying 
powers, and seeing his influence for ever lost, he bade an eternal adieu 
to the assembly of which he had for many years been the most con- 
spicuous member, and in which he found himself reduced to insigni- 
ficance. He now permanently retreated into private life, spending his 
time at his villa, with occasional excursions to Brighthelmstone, to 
Bognor, to Scarborough and to Bath. 

Although no longer. taking any share in parliamentary or party war- 
fare, he cantoued to be consulted, till within a few months of his death, 
respecting the unhappy differences which prevailed in the royal family. 
On occasion of the first communication of the charges made by Lady 
Douglas against Caroline, Princess of Wales, the Prince directed that 
Lord Thurlow’s opinion should be taken as to the course to be followed 
on a matter of such delicacy, and in the Diary of Sir Samuel Romilly 
we have the following interesting statement of the interviews which then 
took place between him and the Ex-chancellor. Having mentioned 
that Colonel M’Mahon brought him Lady Douglas’s ‘“‘ Narrative,” he 
thus proceeds :—* After I had read it, by the desire 
of ie Prince I called on Lord Thurlow. Colonel Ay ap soe aieed 
M’Mahon accompanied me. Lord Thurlow had been very ill, which 
had been the cause of our interview being postponed for a week. He 
was still indisposed, and appeared to be extremely infirm; he was, 
however, in full possession of his faculties, and expressed himself, in 
the conversation we had together, with that coarse energy for which he 
has long been remarkable. He said that he had not been able to read 
all Lady Douglas’s narrative, it was written in so bad a hand, but that 
he had gone rapidly over it, and collected the principal facts (and in 
truth it appeared, from the observations he made, that no fact of any 
importance had escaped him) ; that the first point to be considered was, 
whether her account were true, and that for himself he did not believe 
it. He said, that there was no composition in her narrative (that was 
the expression he used),—no connexion in it—no dates; that some 
parts of it were grossly improbable. He then said, that when he first 
knew the Princess he should have thought her incapable of writing or 
saying any such things as Lady Douglas imputed to her, but that she 
might be altered; that, to be sure, it was a strange thing to take a 
beggar’s child, but a few days old, and adopt it as her own; but, how- 
ever, Princesses had sometimes strange whims, which nobody could 
account for ; that, in some respects, her situation was deserving of great 


* 36 Parl. Hist. 596. The distinction is between treaties which, from their 
nature, are meant to be permanent aud perpetual, such as for cession, boundary or 
exchange of territory ; and such as from their nature are extinguished ‘by hostilities, 
such as for commercial intercourse. Sce Vattel, b. xi. c. xii, § 153; Martens, 
§ 58; Wheaton, part iii. c. xi.; Kent’s Commentaries, i. 177; Sutton v. Sutton, 1 
Russel and Mylne, p. 663. 


474 REIGN OF GEORGE III 


compassion. Upon the whole, his opinion was, that the evidence the 
Prince was in possession of would not justify taking any step on his 
part, and that he had only to wait and see what facts might come to 
light in future. In the mean time, however, that it would be proper to 
employ a person to collect evidence respecting the conduct of the Prin- 
cess,”* No other meeting with Thurlow took place, and the ‘ Deli- 
cate Investigation” proceeded—the misconduct of both the 

: ; in [a.p. 1805.] 
illustrious parties continuing to scandalize the nation long 
after he had left this world. 

Brighthelmstone was now his favourite retreat. The Diary I have be- 
fore quoted for an account of his reconciliation with Horne Tooke, gives 
a lively representation of the life he led there in his declining days :— 
‘“« Another very curious person whom I saw a great deal of in the autumn 
of 1805, sometimes at the Pavilion, sometimes at other houses where 
the Prince dined, and repeatedly at his own house, was Lord Thurlow, 
to whom the Prince always behaved with the most marked attention and 
deference. 

“Thurlow had declined greatly in energy from his encounter with 
Horne Tooke at Lady Oxford’s,. He used to read, and ride out in the 
morning, and his daughter (Mrs. Brown) and Mr. Sneyd the clergyman 
were both always occupied in procuring any strangers, or any other 
persons who they thought would be agreeable to the old man, to dine 
with him —the party being thus ten or twelve every day, or more.—I 
had the good fortune to be occasionally there with my wife, which was 
a civility we owed to some former attentions from her to one of his 
daughters in the county of Durham, and however rough he might be 
with men, he was the politest person in the world to ladies. These two 
or three hours of his at: dinner were-occupied in lying in wait for any 
unfortunate slip or ridiculous observation that might be made by any 
of his male visiters, and whom, when caught, he never left hold of, till 
I have seen the sweat run down their faces from the scrape they had — 
got into, and the unmerciful exposure he made of them. Having seen 
this property of his, I took care of course to keep clear of him, and 
have often been extremely amused in seeing the figure those have cut 
who came with the evident intention of showing off before him. Cur- 
ran, the Irish lawyer, | remember was a striking instance of this. I 
dined with him at Thurlow’s one day, and he (Thurlow) just made as 
great a fool of him as he did formerly of Tooke.— He was always 
dressed in a full suit of clothes of the old fashion, great cuffs and 
massy buttons, great wig, long ruffles, &c. His black eyebrows ex- 
ceeded in size any I have ever seen, and his voice, though by no means 
devoid of melody, was a kind of rolling murmuring thunder. He was 
a man of great reading, particularly classical, and was a very distin- 
guished as well as most daring converser. I never heard of any one 
but Mr. Hare who had fairly beat him, and that this happened I know 
from persons who were present. Hare turned the laugh against him 
more than once at Carlton House and at Woburn. 


* Mem. of Sir S. Romilly, ii. 125. 


LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 475 


* Sir Philip Francis, whom I knew intimately, and who‘certainly was 
a remarkably quick and clever man, was perpetually vowing vengeance 
against Thurlow, and always fixing his time (during this autumn of 
1805) for making ‘an example of the old ruffian,’ as he called him, 
either at the Pavilion, or wherever he met him; but I have seen them 
meet afterwards, and though Thurlow was always ready for battle, 
Francis, who on all other occasions was as bold as a lion, would never 
stir. The grudge he owed to Thurlow was certainly not slightly 
grounded. When Francis, and General Clavering, and Monson, were 
sent to India in 1773, to check Hastings in his career, their conduct by 
one party in Parliament was extolled to the skies, whilst, on the other 
hand, Lord Thurlow in the House of Lords said, ‘ the greatest misfor- 
tune to India and to England was, that the ship which carried these 
three gentlemen out had not gone to the bottom of the sea in her 
passage.’ 

“Lord Thurlow was induced to dine with George Johnstone, who 
being the most ridiculous toady of great men, and aspirer to what he 
thought genteel manners, said to him, ‘I am afraid, my Lord, the port 
wine is not as good as I could wish,’ upon which Thurlow growled out, 
‘I have tasted better,’ 

“‘On one occasion one of the caterers of company for Lord Thur- 
low’s amusement thought he had secured a great card, when he took 
Sir , an F.R.S., a solemn conceited pedant of great preten- 
sion on very moderate foundation, to call upon him. In mentioning the 
circumstance afterwards, Lord Thurlow merely observed, ‘A gentle- 
man did me the honour to call upon me to-day, edeed, I believe he was 
a knight!’ 

a He was fond of good music, and was I believe.a critic in it. When 
he came into the drawing. room after dinner, he generally put his legs 
up on a sofa, and one of “his daughters played on the piano-forte some 
of Handel’s music, and though he might sometimes appear to be dozing, 
if she played carelessly, or music he did not like, he immediately roused 
himself, and said, ‘What are you doing” 

‘** Asa proof of the ‘attention and deference’ above mentioned always 
paid to Lord Thurlow by the Prince, I may add that one day when 
Thurlow was engaged to dine at the Pavilion during the race week, Sir 
John Ladd arrived at Brighton, and the Prince invited him to dinner. 
The Prince was in the room before Thurlow arrived, and mentioned to 
one of the party his fear that Thurlow would not like the company, and 
when ‘ the old Lion’ arrived, the Prince went in to the anteroom to meet 
him, and apologised for the party being larger than he had intended, 
but aitded! ‘that Sir John Ladd was an old find of his, and he céuld 
not avoid asking him to dinner;’ to which Thurlow, in his growling 
voice, aniceronedes ‘] have no objection, Sir, to Sir John Ladd in his pro- 
per place, which I take to be your Royal Highness’s coach-box and not 
your table.’ 

‘One day at dinner at his own house, he heard one of the company 
use the word ‘chromatic,’ as he thought affectedly. ‘What does he 








476 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


say?’ growled out Thurlow, and made his poor victim attempt to ex- 
plain his meaning in a manner that probably cured him of using the 
word for the rest of his life. He was very particular about the des- 
sert, and on one occasion when I was present, a dish of peaches being 
brought to him which he found great fault with,—he had the whole 
dessert, which, for Brighthelmstone, was a fine one, thrown out of the 
window!” : 

Again, we have the Ex-chancellor, in the autumn of the following 
year, when he was very near his end, presented to us in a very striking 
manner by Mr. Jerningham, the brother of Lord Stafford. 

«We afterwards dined at ———— to meet Lord Thurlow, and his 
[Supr. 1806.] psa Mrs. Brown. A large party were assembled 

ere. I was never more struck with the appearance of 
any one than with that of Lord Thurlow. Upon entering the drawing- 
room, where he was seated on a sofa, we were all involuntarily moved 
to silence, and there was a stillness which the fall of a pin would have 
disturbed. He did not move when we came into the room, but slightly 
inclined his head, which had before hung down on his breast. He was 
dressed in an old-fashioned gray suit buttoned very loosely about him, 
and hanging down very low; he had ona brown wig with three rows 
of curls hanging partly over his shoulders, He was very grave and 
spoke: little. His voice is rough, and his manner of speaking slow. 
Lord Thurlow is, I believe, only seventy-five; but from his appearance 
I should have thought him a hundred years old. His large black heavy 
eyes, which he fixes at intervals upon you, are overshadowed with per- 
fectly white eyebrows, and his complexion is pallid and cadaverous. 
Upon literary subjects he ordinarily converses with much seeming plea- 
sure, but having been this morning to the races he was fatigued and 
said very little. At dinner he drank a good deal, but nothing after- 
wards, In the course of conversation, Mr. Mellish being remarked as 
a great favourite of the populace, Lord Thurlow said, ‘ They like him 
as a brother blackguard ;’ and then added, ‘I am of their opinion: I dis- 
like your pious heroes: [ prefer Achilles to Hector, Turnus to Aineas,’ 
Lord Thurlow has a surprising memory, and will uot allow the want of 
it in any one else; but says it is want of attention, and not of memory, 
that occasions forgetfulness. Being asked how long it was since he had 
been in Norfolk, he replied, ‘ About fifty or sixty years ago.’ He went 
home very early, calling loudly for his hat, which | remarked as being 
of black straw, with a very low crown, and the largest rim I ever saw. 
It is easy to see that in his observing mind the most trifling incidents 
remain graven. Thus upon Lady J. being asked a second time at the 
end of dinner whether she would have any wine, Lord Thurlow imme- 
diately exclaimed in a gruff voice, ‘ Lady J. drinks no wine!’ 

“¢ We went to-day to dine at Lord Thurlow’s and upon being sum- 
moned from the drawing-room to dinner, we found him already seated 
at the head of his table in the same costume as the day before, and 
looking equally grave and ill. Lord Bute being mentioned, and some 


. 


LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 477 


one observing that his life was going to be written, Lord Thurlow 
sharply observed, ‘ The life of a fly would be as interesting,’ ”* - 

Thurlow’s career in this world was now near its close. The year 
1806 was remarkable for the death of several of the greatest men Eing- 
land ever produced. In January the proud spirit of (4. p. 1806 
William Pitt, unable longer to witness the utter discom- *”* ~° ‘J 
fiture of his foreign policy, and the triumph of his country’s foes, had 
fled to another state of existence ; and his illustrious rival and successor 
had scarcely begun to exercise the functions of the high office, which, 
after such struggles, he had attained, when he too was summoned away 
while forming plans for the glory of England and for the liberties of 
mankind. 

A few hours before the demise of Charles James Fox,—an event 
which, from the important part he was then performing, excited uni- 
versal interest and general sympathy,t—Thurlow, who had formerly 
filled so large a space in the public eye, breathed his last—almost un- 
observed and unpitied. ‘Soon after the dinners just referred to, while 
he still remained at Brighthelmstone, he was suddenly seized with an 
attack of illness, which carried him off intwo days. I have not learned 
any particulars of his end, but I will hope that it was a good one. I 
trust that, conscious of the approaching change, having sincerely re- 
pented of his violence of temper, of the errors into which he had been 
led by worldly ambition, and of the irregularities of his private life, he 
had seen the worthlessness of the objects by which he had been allured ; 
that having gained the frame of mind which his awful situation required, 
he received the consolations of religion ; and that, in charity with man- 
kind, he tenderly bade a long and last adieu to the relations and friends 
who surrounded him.—He expired on the 12th of September, 1806, in 
the seventy-sixth year of his age. 

Although the news of this event cannot be said to have produced any 
deep sensation in the public mind, the few survivors who had lived with 
Thurlow on terms of intimacy spoke and thought of him with respect 
and tenderness. -I have pleasure in recording, to the honour of the 
Prince of Wales, that he immediately sent for a nephew of the deceased, 
then a very young man,—kindly made him an offer of assistance in 
any profession he might choose,—spoke of his uncle as one whom he 
sincerely loved,—a faithful friend and upright councillor ;—and _la- 
menting his loss, was so much moved that he could not refrain from 
tears. 

The Ex-chancellor’s remains being sent privately to his house in 
Great George Street, Westminster, were conveyed thence, with great 
funeral pomp, to the Temple Church, Lord Chancellor Eldon, the 


* Law Magazine, vol. vii. 90, “ Life of Lord Thurlow,” to which the public is 
first indebted for this interesting account. 
+ Even Walter Scott, a bitter political opponent, after a beautiful tribute to the 
services of Pitt, exclaimed : oe 
“ Nor yet suppress the generous sigh 
Because his rival slumbers nigh.” 


478 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


Chiefs of the three superior Courts, and other legal dignitaries and dis- 
tinguished men attending as mourners,—followed by almost the whole 
profession of the law. . : 4 

Being still only a student at Lincoln’s Inn, I did not witness the so- 
lemnity ; but I well remember being. told, by those who were present, 
of its grandeur and impressiveness. The coffin, with the name, age, 
and dignities of the deceased inscribed upon it, and ornamented with 
heraldic devices, was deposited in the vault under the south aisle of this 
noble structure, which still proves to us the taste as well as the wealth 
of the Knights Templars.* 

In the choir was soon after placed his bust in marble, with the following 


* Here I saw Thurlow reposing, when, nearly forty years after, at the conclusion 
of funeral rites as grand and far more affecting, I assisted to deposit the body of 
my departed friend, Sir William Follett, by his side."—May I be allowed to pay 
a passing tribute of respect to the memory of this most eminent, amiable, and 
virtuous man ?—If it had pleased Providence to prolong his days, he would have 
afforded a nobler subject for some future biographer than most of those whose 
career it has been my task to delineate. When he was prematurely cut off, the 
highest office of the law was within his reach; and I make no doubt that, by 
the great distinction he would have acquired as a judge, as a statesman, and as 
an orator, a deep interest would have been given to all the incidents of his past 
life, which they want with the vulgar herd of mankind, because he never sat 
on the bench, nor had titles of nobility conferred upon him, One most remark- 
able circumstance would have been told respecting his rise to be the most popular 
advocate of his day, to be Attorney-General, and to be a powerful debater in the 
House of Commons—that it was wholly unaccompanied by envy. ‘Those who have 
outstripped their competitors have often a great drawback upon their satisfaction 
by observing the grudging and ill will with which, by some, their success is be- 
held. Such were Follett’s inoffensive manners and unquestioned superiority that 
all rejoiced at every step he attained—as all wept when he was snatched away from 
the still higher honours which seemed to be awaiting him.—It is said : 


“ Envy will merit as its shade pursue, 

But, like a shadow, proves the substance true.” 
“ Fame calls up calumny and spite, 

Thus shadow owes its birth to light.” 


But envy may be conquered. I do not agree in the sentiment contained in Pope’s 
letter to Addison: “‘I congratulate you upon having your share in that which all 
the great men and all the good men that ever lived have had their share of—envy 
and calumny. ‘To be uncensured and to be obscure is the same thing ;’””—nor in 
the aphorism of Mr. Burke: “ Obloquy is a necessary ingredient in the composition 
of all true glory ;”—nor in the Spanish proverb to be found in Lopez de Vega : 


*‘ Dixo undiscreto que era matrimonia 
Polibio el de la embidia de la fama 
Que se apartava solo con la muerta”— 


thus translated by Lord Holland— 


“ Envy was Honour’s wife, a wise man said, 
Ne’er to be parted till the man was dead.” 


There is a superlative degree of excellence, which, like that of superior intelligences, 
men cease to envy, because they feel that to them it is unattainable. 





‘Sir R. Peel, the Prime Minister, Lord Lyndhurst, the Chancellor, and many 
distinguished persons on both sides in politics were present. pee 


LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 479 


inscription by the Reverend Martin Routh, D.D., President of Magdalen 
College, Oxford : j 


“ Baro TuurLow a THURLOW, 
Summus Regni Cancellarius, 
Hic scpultus est, 

Vixit Annis txxv. Mensibus x. 
Decessit anno Salutis Humane mpcccvi. 
Idibus Septembris. 

Vir alta mente et magna preditus, 
Qui 
Nactus preclarissimas occasiones 
Optimé de patria merendo, 
Jura Ecclesie, Regis, Civium, 
In periculum vocata 
Firmo et constanti animo 
Tutatus est.” 


This unqualified praise may be excused in an epitaph; but the 
biographer, in estimating the character and the conduct of the indiyi- 
dual so extolled, is bound to notice his weaknesses, and to warn others 
against the faults which he committed. Even as a Judge, the capa- 
city in which he appears to most advantage, although he was entirely 
free from personal corruption or undue influence, and uniformly desi- 
rous to decide fairly, he was not sufficiently patient in listening to coun- 
sel, and he did not take the requisite pains to extricate the facts, or to 
comprehend the nice legal distinctions in complicated cases which came 
before him. Without devoting much time out of court to the duties of 
his office, no Judge can satisfactorily discharge them, and Thurlow 
seems to have despised the notion of reading law to extend or keep up 
his stock of professional knowledge. Only on very rare occasions 
would he take the trouble in his library of examining the authorities 
cited at the bar, and he used to prepare himself for giving judgment in 
his way from Great Ormond Street to the Court of Chancery, ‘“ An 
old free-speaking companion of his, well known at Lincoln’s Inn, would 
say, ‘I met the Great Law Lion this morning going to Westminster 
and bowed to him, but he was so busy reading in the coach what his 
provider had supplied him with, that he took no notice of me.’”* He 
certainly had an excellent head for law, and with proper pains he might 
have rivalled the fame of Lord Nottingham and Lord Hardwicke ; but 
he was contented with the character of a political Chancellor, and, so 
that he retained power, he was rather indifferent as to the opinion which 
might be formed of him by his contemporaries or by posterity.t He 
often treated the bar with great rudeness, and his demeanour to the 
other branch of the profession sometimes awakened recollections of 


* Cr. i. 80. 

+ Lord Eldon used to be fond of quoting Thurlow as a great lawyer; but this 
was partly from personal liking, Thurlow having patronised him at the bar, and 
was partly in odium of Lord Loughborough, whom he despised as a Judge, and 
of Lord Mansfield, whom he always wished to depreciate from the time when 
he bade adieu to the King’s Bench, on the ground that only Westminster and 
Christchurch men were favoured there.— Twiss’s Life of Eldon, 


480 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


Jeffreys. A solicitor once had to prove a death before him, and being 
told upon every statement he made, ‘Sir, that is no proof,” at last ex- 
claimed, much vexed, ‘*My Lord, it is very hard that you will not be- 
lieve me; I knew him well to his last hour; I saw him dead and in his 
coffin, my Lord. My Lord, he was my client.” Lord Chancellor. 
“Good God, Sir! Why did you not tell me that before? I should 
not have doubted the fact one moment; for I think nothing can be so 
likely to killa man as to have you for his attorney.”* 

As to legal reform, instead of imitating those who held the Great 
Seal in the time of the Commonwealth and soon after the Revolution, 
he not only originated no measures of improvement himself, but he 
violently and pertinaciously opposed those which were brought forward 
by others. Mr. Pitt, though thwarted by Thurlow, really seems to have 
had a desire to reform our jurisprudence as well as our commercial 
policy, till the breaking out of the French revolution,—when the terror 
of Jacobinism put an end to all improvement, and it was unwisely deter- 
mined to try to cure disaffection by rendering the laws more arbitrary. 

Of statesmanship he several times declared with great candour and 
truth that he knew very little. Unless when he went into open oppo- 
sition to the Minister under whom he held the Great Seal, he blindly 
adopted whatever measures were brought forward by the Government, 
supporting them much less by information and argument than by zeal 
and violence. Yet he seems to have been considered a very useful 
partisan—from the protection he could afford to his friends, and the 
terror he inspired into his enemies. He served Lord North with un- 
wearying good faith, and I really do not think he can justly be accused 
of treachery to Lord Rockingham, as while in the cabinet with that 
nobleman, he avowedly led the opposition from the woolsack. His 
double dealing during the King’s illness has affixed a permanent blot 
upon his character ; but his subsequent hostility to Mr. Pitt, though very 
intemperate and wrong-headed, cannot be denominated perfidious, as it 
was openly manifested in Parliament, instead of working in secret in- 
trigues. His career after he was deprived of office, must be allowed 
to have been obscure and inglorious—his late-born zeal for liberty ap- 
pearing to have sprung from personal dislike of the minister—not from 
any altered view he had taken of the constitutional rights,—and having 
died away with the chance of his own restoration to office. 

His judicial patronage was upon the whole well exercised, notwith- 
standing his occasional indulgence in personal antipathies, as in the case 
of Pepper Arden, who, in spite of him, was made Master of the Rolls 
and Baron Alvanley, and whose judgments are now regarded with high 
respect.t When created Lord Chancellor, he would not remove any of 

* This jest, which was probably thought innocuous by the author of it, is said 
to have ruined the reputation and the business of the unfortunate victim. 

Fini og preference of Buller to Pepper Arden is thus referred to by Peter 
indar: 
“And bond fide, not of rapture fuller, 
Thurlow the Seal and royal conscience keeper 


Sees his prime favourite, Mister Justice Buller, 
High thron’d in Chancery, grieve the poor Sir Pepper.” 





LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 481 


the officers appointed by his predecessors, or any Commissioners of 
Bankrupt,* except one, who made an application to him to be continued 
through his mistress.t The public owed to him the services of Lord 
Kenyon, and other eminent Judges, and he first, discovered, and put in 
the line of promotion, the greatest lawyer of our times—John Scott— 
afterwards the Earl of Eldon. 

In his ecclesiastical appointments he is said to have been less scru- 
pulous, and to have been chiefly influenced by personal favour or politi- 
cal convenience, Yet forming a high opinion of Horsley, merely, from 
accidentally reading his Letters to Priestley, he gave him a stall at 
Gloucester, saying that “those who supported the Church should be 
supported by it,” and afterwards recommended him to the episcopal 
bench. When Patten, who dedicated to him a translation of A%schylus, 
had published his translations of Sophocles and Euripides, [a.p. 1788 
Thurlow procured for him a stall at Norwich, observing ”*~* ‘] 
that ‘* he did not like to promote him earlier for fear of making him in- 
dolent.” He first put other eminent divines in the line of high pro- 
motion. 

On one occasion, a considerable living fell vacant in the Chancellor’s 
gift, which was solicited by Queen Charlotte, and promised to her protege. 
The curate who had served in the parish some years, hearing who was 
likely to succeed, modestly applied for the Chancellor’s intercession, that 
on account of his large family he might be continued in the curacy. 
The expectant rector calling to return thanks, Thurlow introduced the 
case of the curate, which he represented with great strength and pathos ; 
but the answer was, ‘‘I should be much pleased to oblige your Lord- 
ship, but unfortunately I have promised it to a friend.” Thurlow.— 
“Sir, I cannot make this gentleman your curate, it is true; but I can 
make him the rector, and by G—d he shall have the living as he can- 
not have the curacy.” He instantly called in his secretary, and ordered 
the presentation to be made out in favour of the curate,—who was in- 
ducted, and enjoyed the living many years.§ 

Of his oratory I have given the most favourable specimens I could 
select,—using the freedom sometimes to correct his inaccuracies of lan- 
guage; for even the printed reports justify Mr. Butler’s remark, that 
“though Lord Thurlow spoke slowly and deliberately, yet his periods 
were strangely confused, and often ungrammatical.”|| It argues little 


*It had been usual for a new Lord Chancellor to have what was called “a 
scratch,”—sweeping away the greater part of the seventy, and substituting his 
own favourites. 

+ He thus imitated the conduct of George IT. with respect to Lady Suffolk. 

+ Having received the copy of an Essay from a Yorkshire parson which pleased 
him, he thus wrote to him: “ Sir,—I return many thanks for the Essay you have 
sent me. Give me leave, in my turn, to inquire after your situation, and how far 
that or your inclination attaches you to Leeds or Yorkshire. I am, Sir, your obt 
serv', THurtow.—lI wish your answer in return of post.” 

§ This anecdote I have from a nephew of the Chancellor. How he settled the 
matter with the Queen I have not heard, but we may suppose that her Majesty 
highly approved of this equitable decision. 

|| Reminisce. i. 142. 


VOL, V. 31 


* 


482 REIGN OF GEORGE IIL 


for the discrimination and taste of those to whom they were addressed, 
that they were listened to with profound attention, and produced a deep 
effect, though chiefly made up of “sound and fury ;” while Edmund 
Burke acquired the nickname of the “*Dznner-bell,” by delivering the 
finest speeches for depth of thought and beauty of diction to be found 
in our Parliamentary records. 

Thurlow himself appears always to have had a great contempt for 
his audience in the House of Peers, and to have reckoned with daring 
confidence on their ignorance, Of this we have a striking instance in 
the Memoirs of Bishop Watson, who, having informed us that in a 
speech the Right Reverend Prelate made during the King’s illness in 
1788, respecting the “right” of the Prince of Wales to be Regent, he 
quoted a definition of “right” from Grortus, thus proceeds: ‘ The 
Chancellor in his reply boldly asserted that he perfectly well remem- 
bered the passage I had quoted from Grotius, and that it solely respected 
natural, but was inapplicable to cvvél rights. Lord Loughborough, the 
first time I saw him after the debate, assured me that, before he went 
to sleep that night, he had looked into Grotius, and was astonished to 
find that the Chancellor, in contradicting me, had presumed on the igno- 
rance of the House, and that my quotation was perfectly correct. 
What miserable shifts do great men submit to in supporting their 
parties !’* 

We have the following very striking representation of his oratory 
from a skilful rhetorician :—‘* He rose slowly from his seat; he left the 
woolsack with deliberation; but he went not to the nearest place like 
ordinary Chancellors, the sons of mortal men; he drew back by a pace 
or two, and standing as it were askance, and partly behind the huge 
bale he had quitted for a season, he began to pour out, first in a growl, 
and then ina clear and louder roll, the matter which he had to deliver, 
and which, for the most part, consisted in some positive assertions, some 
personal vituperation, some sarcasms at classes, some sentences pro- 
nounced upon individuals, as if they were standing before himfor judg- 
ment, some vague mysterious threats of things purposely not expressed, 
and abundant protestations of conscience and duty, in which they who 
keep the consciences of Kings are somewhat apt to indulge.” 

Butler, who had often heard him, ascribes to him a finesse, which I 
should not have discovered from the printed reports of his speeches,— 
for his apparent ignorance I should judge wholly unaffected, and he 
seems to me always to aim direct blows against his adversary: ‘‘ He 
would appear to be ignorant of the subject in debate, and with affected 

‘respect, but visible derision, to seek for information upon it, pointing out 
with a kind of dry solemn humour, contradictions and absurdities which 
he professed his own inability to explain, and calling upon his adver- 
saries for their explanation. It was a kind of masked battery, of the 
most searching questions and distressing observations ; it often discom- 
fited his adversary, and seldom failed to force him into a very embar- 


* Life of Watson, 221. + Lord Brougham’s Characters, i. 94. 





LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 483 


rassing position of defence; it was the more effective, as, while he was 
playing it off, his Lordship showed he-had command of much more for- 
midable artillery.” 

Lord Thurlow does not figure in Horace Walpole’s list of noble and 
royal authors—never, as far as I know, having taken the trouble even 
to publish a pamphlet or aspeech, Although he knew nothing of politi- 
cal economy, or of any science,* he had made himself thoroughly ac- 
quainted with the classics, Latin and Greek, ‘These studies were the 
delight of his old age. When living in retirement at Dulwich, he found 
some consolation for the loss of power and of political excitement, in 
superintending the classical education of his nephews, who lived under 
his roof, and to whom he was very tenderly attached. For their instruc- 
tion and amusement he would sometimes himself attempt to translate 
into English verse favourite passages of the ancient authors they were 
reading. As acurious specimen of his poetical powers I am enabled 
to lay before the public the following translation of a chorus, from the 
Hippolytus of Euripides :T 


* He is said to have been very fond of music, and to have understood the theory 
of it perfectly, although the soothing charm usually imputed to it does not seem to 
have operated upon him. 

t The learned reader will recollect that the guilty love of Phedra for Hippolytus 
had been disclosed to him by the Nurse, and that the heroine, on account of the re- 
pulse she met with, had declared her determination to hang herself. I subjoin the 
origina] Chorus : 

"HAbdrotg 616 KevOpaot yevvoipay, 
"Iva pe mrepodocay dpyiv 

Oed5 év roravats dyéXnow Sein. 
"Apbeiny yap éxt révriov Kina 
Tds ’Adptpvas dxrds, 

"Hpidavovl’ tdwp. 

*EvOa roppbpeov craddccovew 

Els oidua rarpés rptradawat 
Képat, Baédovros otxrw, daxpowy “ 
Tas nAexrpopasis abyds. 
‘Eorepidwy 0° éxt pndAbaropoy dxray 
"Avocatme trav AowWdy, 

Iv’ 6 rovropédwy roppupéas Aipyns 
Nairats ovx £0" bddv véper, ospvdv 
Téppova kupav dvpa- 

vow tov *Ardas éxet* 

Kpiivai r’ dpbpociar xéovrac 

Znvos peaOpwv mapa xotrats, 

“Iv’ dAb6dwpog afer Sabéa 

XOdyv evdatpoviay Scots. 

*Q Nevkérrepe Kpnoia 

Tlop6pis, & dtd révrioy 

Kip’ adixrunov &dApas 

"Enépevoas énay dvaccay 

ON (wv an’ otkwy 
Kakovvpgordray dvacw. 

"H yap dn’ dudorépwr, 

"H Kpnotas ix yas dbcopyec 
*Exraro k\ewas ’AOjvas, Mov- 
vuxiov 6’ éx’ derats éxdjoaro 

_ Tekras retsudrwy dpxas, 
’Er’ dreipov re yas Ebacay. 
"Av0 By obx bciwy épi- 
Tov dewd ppévas ’Adpodt- 
Tas voow KarexddsOn. 


484 REIGN OF GEORGE II. 


**Oh, could I those deep caverns reach, 
Where me, a winged bird, among 
The feather’d race 
Some God might place! 
And rising could I soar along 
The sea-wave of the Adrian beach! 
And by the Po my pinions spread, 
Where, in their father’s ruddy wave, 
Their amber tears his daughters shed, ~ 
Still weeping o’er a brother’s grave! 
Or to those gardens make my way, 
Where carol the Hesperian maids, 
And He, who rules 
The purple pools, 
The sailor’s further course impedes, 
The awful limits of the sky 
Fixing, which Atlas there sustains ! 
And Spring’s ambrosial near the dome 
Of Jove still water those rich plains, 
Whence to the Gods their blessings come. 


1 


White-wing’d bark of Cretan wood, 
Which across the briny main, 
Over the sea-raging flood, 
From her happy home our Queen 
Convey’d, a most unhappy bride, 
In ill-starr’d wedlock to be tied! 


Il. 


Dire both omens ; when her flight 
Left behind the Cretan land ; 

And when Athens came in sight, 
Where, on the Munychian strand, 

They tie the hawser’s twisted end, 


And on the mainland straight descend. 
< 


Ill. 

For unhallow’d passion rent, 
Planted deep, her lab’ring breast, 

Dire disease, which Venus sent. 
And, with sore misfortune prest, 

The chord suspended from the dome 
Of her ill-fated bridal room. 


Iv. 
Round her milk-white neck she’ll tie, 
Dreading much the adverse frown | 
Of the Goddess—prizing high 
Her unspotted chaste renown— 
And from her heart resolved to move, 
This only way, the pain of Love.” 





XaNera 3 brépavr\os otca 

Luppopa, repapvwv 

"Ard voppiwiwy kpénasrov 

“Awerat dudl Bpdxov 

Aevkd xabappdSovca dépa, 

Aaipova orvyvéy Kkaratdecbet- 

ca, trav 7’ evdotov dvOapovpéva 

Pdpav, draddaooovca 

T’ ddyewov dpevav Epwra, Eur. Hip. 732. 





LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 485 


There is likewise extant, in his handwriting, a translation of the 
whole of the BATPAXOMYOMAXIA, “or Battle of the Frogs and 
the Mice,” the merit of which may be judged of by the following ex- 
tract : 

BrappER-CHEEK, his Ranish Majesty, having vauntingly begun the 
dialogue,— 


“ Him Crums-Catcu answer’d quick in vocal sounds, 
‘Why, friend, my birth demand, so known to men, 
To Gods, and to the fowl who wing the sky ? 

My name is Crumb.Catch, and I am the son 

Of Nibble-Biscuit, my great-hearted sire ; 
Lick-Mill’s my mother, King Gnaw-Gammon’s child. 
She bore me in a hole, and brought me up 

With figs, and nuts, and ev’ry sort of food. 

But how make me thy friend, unlike in kind ? 
Thy living is in waters; but my food, 

Whatever man is us’d to eat. The loaf 
Thrice-kneaded, in the neat round basket kept, 
Escapes not me, nor wafer, flat and long, 

Mix’d with much sesame, nor bacon-slice, 

Nor liver, cloth’d in jacket of white lard, 

Nor cheese, fresh curdled from delicious milk, 
Nor the good sweetmeats, which the wealthy love, 
Nor what else:cooks prepare to feast mankind, 
Pressing their dishes with each kind of sauce. 


But these two chief I fear in all the earth, ; 
The hawk and cat, who work me heavy wo; 
And doleful trap, where treach’rous Death resides.’ 


BiappeEr-CuE&k, smiling to all this, replied : 

‘ Upon the belly’s fare thou vauntest high, 

My guest! We, too, have wonders to behold, 

Numberless, both by water and by sod ; 

For to the frogs the son of Saturn gave 

A lot amphibious, to leap on earth, 

And under water hide their body safe. 

If thou would’st these explore, they are at hand: 
I'll take thee on my back.’ ”’* 





* Tov 0 at ¥ixdprat jpeibero dadvncévre® 
Tinre yévos rovpdv Snrets, pire, didov Gracw 
*AvOpinots re, Yeots re, Kal obpaviots werEnvots ; 
Wixdprat piv eyes kuxdjoxopac lui 62 kovpos 
Tpwtdprao rarpoa peyadhropos, h dé vv pnrhp 
Astxopirn Suyarnp Urepvorpwixrov Bactdjos. 
Tetvaro 0 év kaddbnpe, kai éxeOptWaro Bpwrois, 
Lixots Kai Kapdows Kat édécpact ravrodanoict. 
Tac dé pidov rouy pe, rdv eis pboww oddév bnoior , 
Loi piv yap Bios éoriv év Bdacw' abrap Eporye, 
"Ooca rap dvOpcimots, rpiyew &O0g. Ovdé pe jOec 
*Apros tpiskwmaviaros éx’ ebxdxov Kavéowo, 
OvdE tAaKkods ravimrerdos EXwY TOAD onTapdrvpor, 
Od répos &x rrépyns, odx Hrara \evKoXirwra, 
Od rupdg vedrnkrog dxd yvKepoto yadakros, 
Od xpnordy pedirwpa, 7d Kat paxapes rdDEoveW, 
Oid’ boa mpds Soivas pepdrwy rebxXover payetpoe 
Koopodvres Xirpds dpripact ravrodanoicw. 


f 


*"AXAG bbw pada ravra, ra detdia rdcay én’ aiav, 





486 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


Tired of higher studies Thurlow became, in his retirement, a great 
reader of novels; and, in one instance, so interested was he in the plot, 
that he despatched his groom from Dulwich to London, after ten o’clock 
at night, for the concluding volume, that he might know the fate of the 
heroine before trying to go to sleep. 

His great ambition from early youth, and through life, was to shine 
in conversation, and in this department of genius he seems to have met 
with brilliant success. He had a stupendous memory, a quick sense of 
the ridiculous, a copious flow of words, and an emphasis in talk, which 
occasionally supplied the place of epigram. With these qualifications, 
if he had not made his fortune in the law, he would have risen to great 
eminence as a “diner out.” He was rather fond of literary society, 
and laying aside all official privilege, he boldly descended into the arena 
against controversial gladiators. He received this high compliment 
from Dr. Johnson, while yet at the bar, ‘‘ Depend upon it, sir, it is when 
you come close to a man, in conversation, that you discover what his 
real abilities are: to make a speech in a public assembly is a knack. 
Now I honour Thurlow, sir; Thurlow is a fine fellow; he fairly puts 
his mind to yours.” After his Lordship had been elevated to be Chan- 
cellor, the great Lexicographer said to Boswell, ‘I would prepare my- 
self for no man in England but Lord Thurlow. When I am to meet 
him, I should wish to know a day before.” Jemmy goes on to say, 
‘“¢ How he would have prepared himself, I cannot conjecture. Would 
he have selected certain topics, and considered them in every view, so 
as to be in readiness to argue them at all points?) And what may we 
suppose those topics to have been? J once started the curious inquiry 
to the great man who was the subject of this compliment: he smiled, 
but did not pursue it.””* 

Thurlow was not ill-natured in conversation; and Johnson was con- 
sidered a more terrible opponent. Craddock, who knew both intimately, 
says: ‘I was always more afraid of Johnson than of Thurlow; for 
though the latter was sometimes very rough and coarse, yet the decisive 
stroke of the former left a mortal wound behind it.” 

According to the fashion still prevailing in his time, he used to have 
long symposiac szédéengs after dinner, during which his wit was stimu- 
lated by the brisk circulation of the bottle. ‘In the afternoon of life, 
conviviality, wine, and society unbent his mind. It was with Mr. Rigby, 
Lord Gower, Lord Weymouth, Mr. Dundas, and a few other select 


Kipkov kat yadény, of Hoe péya révOos a dyovot, 
Kai rayida orovéeccay, brov doers rede OTpOS. 


TIpds witde pswdfioas votyvabos dvriov huda" 
Eetve, Niny, avxets eri yaorépe fort Kai ftv 
TIod\a pad’ ev Aipyn kat ért xOovi Satpar’ idéoOat. 
*"Appibrov yap | EdwWKE vopiy Barpaxorse Kpoviwy, 
Teprhoal kara yiv, Kai ey tdact cOpa kahoWat, 
(Trocxelots dvaiv HEBEpopeva dspara vaiew.) 

Ei a0 éets Kai radra darpevar, edxepés éort, 


Baitvé pot év vedroiwe 
Hom, Batr. 24. 


* Boswell’s Life of Johnson, iv. 192, 350. FT Cre aide 





LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 487 


friends, that he threw off his constitutional severity.”* Though by no 
means subject to the charge of habitual intemperance, yet from occa- 
sional indulgence he sometimes found himself in scenes, which, accord- 
ing to our sober notions, were not very fit for a Chancellor. ‘ Return- 
ing, by way of frolic,” relates Sir Nathaniel Wraxall, ‘‘ very late at 
night, on horseback, to Wimbledon from Addiscombe, the seat of Mr, 
Jenkinson, near Croydon, where the party had dined, Lord Thurlow, 
the Chancellor, Pitt, and Dundas, found the turnpike-gate, situate between 
Tooting and Streatham, thrown open. Being elevated above their usual 
prudence, and having no servant near them, they passed through the 
gate at a brisk pace, without stopping to pay the toll, regardless of the 
remonstrances and threats of the turnpike-man, who running after them, 
and believing them to belong to some highwaymen who had recently 
committed some depredation on that road, discharged the contents of his 
bluoderbuss at their backs. Happily he did no injury.” 

There are a few of Thurlow’s pointed sayings handed down to us, but 
I suspect that even a Boswell could not have supported for him the 
reputation he enjoyed in his own time. In the Duchess of Kingston’s 
case, two learned Doctors of the Civil Law pouring forth heavily much 
recondite lore, having gravely argued that the sentence of the Ecclesi- 
astical Court, annulling her first marriage, was decisive in her favour,— 
the Attorney-General was pleased to remark, that ‘‘ the congress of two 
civilians from Doctors’? Commons always reminded him of the noted 
observation of Crassus, Merart se quod Haruspex Haruspicem sine 
risu adspicere posset.” In the debates on the Regency, a prim Peer, 
remarkable for his finical delicacy, and formal adherence to etiquette, 
having cited pompously certain resolutions, which he said had been 
passed by a party of noblemen and gentlemen of great distinction at the 
Thatched House Tavern, the Lord Chancellor, in adverting to these, 
said, ‘¢‘ As to what the noble Lord in the red riband told us that he had 
heard at the alehouse .’ Such strokes of coarse. jocularity, tell 
more certainly in either House than the play of the most refined wit. 
Even when in administration, he affected to laugh freely at official men 
and practices. Thus, when on the woolsack, having mentioned some 
public functionary whose conduct he intimated that he disapproved, he 
thought fit to add, “* But far be it from me to express any blame of any 
official person, whatever may be my opinion ; for that I well know would 
be sure to bring down upon me a panegyric on his character and his 
services ??__Lamenting the great difficulty he had in disposing of a high 
legal situation, he described himself as long hesitating between the 
intemperance of A. and the corruption of B., but finally preferring the 
man of bad temper. Afraid lest he should have been supposed to have 
admitted the existence of pure moral worth, he added,—*“ Not but that 
there was a d—d deal of corruption: in A.’s intemperance.”—Happen- 
ing to be at the British Museum viewing the Townley Marbles, when a 





* Wrax. Mem. i. 527. - +t Wrax. Mem. i. 478. 


488 REIGN OF GEORGE IIL. 


person came in and announced the death of Mr. Pitt, Thurlow was 
heard to say, ‘a d—d good hand at turning a period!” and no more.* 

The following anecdote was related by Lord Eldon :—* After dinner, 
one day when nobody was present but Lord Kenyon and myself, Lord 
Thurlow said, ‘ Taffy, I decided a cause this morning, and I saw from 
Scott’s face that he doubted whether I was right.’ Thurlow then stated 
his view of the case, and Kenyon instantly said, ‘ Your decision was 
quite right.’ ‘ What say you to that? asked the Chancellor. I said, 
‘I did not presume to form a judgment upon a case in which they both 
agreed, But [ think a fact has not been mentioned, which may be ma- 
terial.’ I was about to state the fact and my reasons. Kenyon, how- 
ever, broke in upon me, and with some warmth, stated that I was always 
so obstinate, there was no dealing with me. ‘ Nay,’ interposed Thur- 
low, ‘that’s not fair. You, Taffy, are obstinate, and give no reasons ; 
you, Jack Scott, are obstinate too; but then you give your reasons, and 
d—d bad ones they are!’” 

Thurlow having heard that Kenyon had said to a party who had 
threatened to appeal from his decision, by filing a bill in Chancery, ** Go 
into Chancery then: abz am malam rem /”—the next time he met the 
testy Chief Justice, he said, “‘ Taffy, when did you first think the Court 
of Chancery was such a mala res? JI remember when you made a 
very good thing of it.” 

Pepper Arden, whom he hated and persecuted, having been made a 
‘Welsh Judge by Pitt, and still continuing to practise at ‘the Chancery 
bar, was arguing a cause against his boon companion, Graham, and 
something turning upon the age of a lady, who swore she was only 
forty-five, he said he was sure she was more, and his antagonist look- 
ing dissent, he exclaimed, so as to be heard by all present, “ I’ll lay 
you a bottle of wine of it.” Thurlow did not swear aloud, but by an 
ejaculation and a frown, called the unwary counsel to a sense of the 
impropriety he had committed. Pepper Arden.—‘ beg your Lord- 
ship’s pardon: I really forgot where I was.” —Thurlow.—*‘ 1 suppose, 
Sir, you thought you were sitting on the bench in your own Court ad- 
ministering justice in Wales !” 

Considering Thurlow’s relish for literary society, we must wonder 
and regret that he did not continue to cultivate the friendship of the man 
with whom he had been so intimate, when they were fellow pupils in 
the Solicitor’s office; but he does not seem by any means properly to 
have appreciated the fine imagination, the quiet humour, the simple 
manners, or the affectionate heart, which ought to have attached him to 
Cowper. While the poet watched with solicitude the career of the 
lawyer, rejoicing at every step of his advancement, the lawyer was 
quite indifferent to the successes or the sorrows of the poet. Cowper, 
though neglected and forgotten by his brother idler of Southampton 
Row, who now filled the most exalted office in the kingdom, hearing 
that he was laid up by the gout, lovingly blind to all his faults, thus 


* This last saying I have from a person who was present. 


ae 


LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 489 


writes to Mr, Hill:—* These violent attacks of a dis- 
tem ften fatal, are very alarming to those who Ld Sa hone 

per so o 5 y g 
esteem and respect the Chancellor as he deserves. A life of confine- 
ment and anxious attention to important objects, where the habit is bilious 
to such a terrible degree, threatens to be a short one; and I wish he 
may not be made a topic for men of reflection to moralise upon, afford- 
ing a conspicuous instance of the transient and fading nature of all 
human accomplishments and attainments.” On Thurlow’s elevation to 
the woolsack, Cowper was strongly advised to remind him of their 
former intimacy, but he declined to do so for the reasons expressed in 
the following letter to Mr. Unwin :— I feel much 

ag tet ade ey [Jan. 18, 1788.] 
obliged to you for your kind intimation, and have 
given the subject of it all my best attention, both before I received your 
letter and since. The result is, that I am persuaded it will be better not 
to write. J know the man and his disposition well ; he is very liberal 
in his way of thinking,—generous and discerning. He is well aware 
of the tricks which are played on such occasions; and after fifteen 
years interruption of all intercourse between us, would translate my 
letter into this Janguage,—‘ Pray remember the poor.’ This would 
disgust him, because he would think our former intimacy disgraced by 
such an oblique application. He has not forgotten me ; and if he had, 
there are those about him who cannot come into his presence without 
reminding him of me; and he is also perfectly acquainted with my 
circumstances. It would perhaps givé him pleasure to surprise me 
with a benefit, and if he means me such a favour, I should disappoint 
him by asking it.”—However, at the continued instigation of his 
friends, he afterwards sent Thurlow a copy of his published poems, by 
this time familiar and dear to all men of taste, with the following stiff 
letter of compliment :— 


“ Olney, Bucks, Feb. 25, 1782. 
“ My Lord, 

a make no apology for what I account a duty ; I should offend 
against the cordiality of our former friendship should I send a volume 
into the world, and forget how much I am bound to pay my particular 
respects to your Lordship upon that occasion. When we parted, you 
little thought of hearing from me again, and [ as little thought I should 


live to write to you, still less that I should wait on you in the capacity 


of an author. 

** Among the pieces. which I have the honour to send, there is one for 
which I must entreat your pardon; I mean that of which your Lord- 
ship is the subject.* My best excuse is, that it flowed almost spon- 
taneously from the affectionate remembrance of a connexion which did 
me so much honour. 

‘‘T have the honour to be, though with very different impressions of 
some subjects, yet with the same sentiments of affection and esteem as 
ever, your Lordship’s faithful ane most obedient humble servant, 

“W. Cowrer.” 


* Ante, p. 400. 


490 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


Strange to say, for at least two months no notice was taken of this 
communication,—as we learn from a letter to another correspondent 
from the poet,—who, though piqued by this mortifying neglect, tried to 
reconcile himself to it by recollecting how much the Chancellor’s time 
was occupied. Afterwards, through the mediation of Hayley, Thurlow, 
who seems to have much admired the tinsel of this versifier, was in- 
duced to take some notice of the author of the Tasx and of Jonw G1LPin, 
—without either making any provision for him, or soothing him with 
personal kindness, Yet when Thurlow was out of office, in the year 
1783, Cowper writes thus tenderly to Mr. Hill :—*‘I have an etching of 
the late Chancellor hanging over the parlour chimney. 1 often contem- 
plate it, and call to mind the day when I was intimate with the original. 
It is very like him}; but he is disfigured by his hat, which, though 
fashionable, is awkward ; by his great wig, the tie of which is hardly 
discernible in profile ; and by his band and gown, which give him an 
appearance clumsily sacerdotal. Our friendship is dead and buried.” 

After Thurlow had been some years restored to office, Cowper being 
again urged to apply to him for some promotion, thus wrote to Lady 

[Fes. 11, 1786.] Hesketh :—* I do not wish to remind the Chancellor 

ee ‘4 of his promise. Ask you why, my cousin? Because 
I suppose it would be impossible. He has no doubt forgotten it entirely, 
and would be obliged to take my word for the truth of it, which I could 
not bear. We drank tea together, with Mrs. C e, and her sister, 
in King Street, Bloomsbury, and there was the promise made. I said, 
‘ Thurlow, I am nobody, and shall be always nobody, and you will be 
Chancellor. You shall provide for me when you are.’ He smiled, and 
replied, ‘I surely will.—‘ These ladies,’ said I, ‘are witnesses.’ He 
still smiled, and said, ‘ Let them be so, for I will certainly do it.’ But, 
alas, twenty-four years have passed since the day of the date thereof, 
and to mention it now would be to upbraid him with inattention to the 
plighted troth. Neither do I suppose that he could easily serve such a 
creature as I am if he would.” 

Cowper seems to have persevered in his resolution not to claim per- 

formance of the promise. Yet a few months alter 
[Jorn 9, 1786. he thus writes to ae Hill, showing his disinterested 





and unabated regard for his surly friend: ‘‘ The paper tells me that the ~ 


Chancellor has relapsed, and I am truly sorry to hear it. The first 
attack was dangerous, but a second must be more formidable still. It 
is not probable that I should ever hear from him again if he survives ; 
yet of what I should have felt for him had our connexion never been 
interrupted, I still feel much. Every body will feel the loss of a man. 
of such general importance.””* 


* Thurlow was probably disinclined to patronise Cowper from the part taken by 
the poet on the question of the African slave trade. He who thought the condition 
of the blacks much improved when sent from their own country to the West Indies, 
must have viewed with contempt 


“ Tue Necro’s CompLaint. 


“ Fore’d from home and all its pleasures, 
Afric’s coast I left forlorn, 


ee 


LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 491 


While Cowper was thus neglected, the advances of Hayley, a stran- 
ger, met with a more flattering reception. From the low taste for 
poetry then prevailing in England, he was for a fleeting space cele- 
brated as a genius, and Thurlow was pleased with being considered one 
of his patrons. We have from the very amiable but vapid versifier, a 
rather amusing account of their meeting :— 


“Nov. 11. 


“Tt will I know afford you pleasure to hear that I am engaged to 
breakfast with the Chancellor, at eight to-morrow morning. He has 
sent me a polite and cordial invitation by our friend Carwardine.” 


“ Nov. 12. 


“ Though honours are seldom I believe found to be real enjoyments, 
yet I may truly say that I have had the honour of breakfasting to-day 
with the Chancellor, and thoroughly enjoyed it. Breakfast, you know, 
is my favourite social hour, and though I was by no means recovered 
from an oppressive cold, yet I passed a very pleasant hour or rather 
two with this singular great man. On my entrance, I told him that I 
was particularly flattered in being admitted at that friendly hour; for 
that I was such a hermit, and such a humourist that I had a horror of 
dining with a great man. As I came away, he said he hoped I would 
come some day to a private dinner with him where there was no more 
form than at his breakfast table; to which I replied, that if I found his 
dinner like his breakfast, | would come whenever he pleased.’’* 

Hayley, emboldened by this condescension, sent the Chancellor a 
copy of some of the very worst of his poems, and immediately received 
the following complimentary answer, ‘The Chancellor presents his 
best respects to Mr, Hayley, and returns him many thanks for his 
poems. ‘They give a bright relief to the subject. William is much 
obliged to him, and Mary more ; and if it may be said without offence, 
liberty itself derives advantage from this dress.” Hayley exclaimed, 
‘“‘There’s flattery for you from the great! Can any poetical vanity 
wish for more ?”} 1 

The intercourse between the two Southampton Row idlers was after- 
wards renewed, Thurlow, in his retirement, hearing that Cowper was 


To increase a stranger’s treasures, 
O’er the raging billows borne. 
Men from England bought and sold me, 
Paid my price in paltry gold; 
But, though slave they have enroll’d me, 
Minds are never to be sold.” 
The Chancellor’s neglect of his early friend is thus ironically recorded by Peter 
Pindar : 
“ Yet let one action of the day shine forth 
(And candour loves to dwell upon my tongue), 
Thurlow could see a Cowper’s modest worth, 
And crown with fair reward his moral song.” 


* Mem. of Hayley, i. 370. +t Mem. of Hayley, i. 369. 


492 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


engaged in a blank verse translation of Homer, expressed to a common 
friend some regret that he should not have preferred rhyme, of which 
he was so great a master, and in which he had been so successful. The 
poet thereupon, when he could no longer be suspected of flattering 
power, thus addressed the Ex-chancellor :—‘*I did not expect to find 
your Lordship on the side of rhyme, remembering well with how. much 
energy and interest I have heard you repeat passages from the ‘ Para- 
dise Lost,’ which you could not have recited as you did, unless you had 
been perfectly sensible of their music. It comforts me, therefore, to 
know, that if you have an ear for rhyme, you have an ear for blank 
verse also. It seems to me that I may justly complain of rhyme as an 
inconvenience in translation, even though | assert in the sequel that to 
me it has been easier to rhyme than to write without, because I always 
suppose a rhyming translator to ramble, and always obliged to do so.” 

The following answer displays great critical acumen and depth of 
thought :—* The scrawl I sent Harry I have forgot too much to. re- 
sume now. But I think I could not mean to patronise rhyme. I have 
fancied that it was introduced to mark the measure in modern lan- 
guages, because they are less numerous and metrical than the ancient ; 
and the name seems to impart as much. Perhaps there was melody in 
ancient song without straining it to musical notes, as the common Greek 
pronunciation is said to have had the compass of five parts of an octave. 
But surely that word is only figuratively applied to modern poetry. 
Euphony seems to be the highest term it will bear. I have fancied 
also that euphony is an impression derived a good deal from habit, 
rather than suggested by nature; therefore, in some degree, accidental, 
and consequently conventional. Else why can’t we bear a drama with 
rhyme, or the French one without it? Suppose the ‘ Rape of the Lock,’ 
‘ Windsor Forest,’ ¢ L’Allegro,’ ‘Il Penseroso,’ and many other little 
poems which please, stripped of the rhyme, which might easily be done, 
would they please as well? It would be unfair to treat rondeaus, bal- 
lads, and odes in the same manner, because rhyme makes in some sort 
apart of the conceit. It was this way of thinking which made me 
suppose that habitual prejudice would miss the rhyme, and that neither 
Dryden nor Pope would have dared to give their great authors in blank 
verse, ' 

‘* It is impossible to obtain the same sense from a dead language and 
an ancient author, which those of his own time and country conceived ; 
words and phrases contract from time and use such strong shades of 
difference from their original import. In a living language, with the 
familiarity of a whole life, it is not easy to conceive truly the actual 
sense of current expressions, much less of older authors. No two lan-— 
guages furnish eguzpollent words ; their phrases differ, their syntax and 
their idioms still more widely. But a translation, strictly so called, re- 
quires an exact conformity in all those particulars, and also in numbers ; 
therefore it is impossible. I really think at present, notwithstanding 
the opinion expressed in your preface, that a translator asks himself a 
good question,—* How would my author have expressed the sentence | 


~~ a oe te ee an 


. 
wt 
| 


| 


LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 493 


am turning into English? for every idea conveyed in the original 
should be expressed in English as literally and fully as the genius and 
use and character of the language will admit of. You must not trans- 
late literally :— 


, 


‘Old daddy Phenix, a God-send for us to maintain.’ 


‘J will end by giving you the strictest translation I can invent of the 
speech of Achilles to Pheenix, leaving you the double task of bringing 
it closer, and of polishing it into the style of poetry :— 


“Ah! Phenix, aged father, guest of Jove! 

- [relish no such honours ; for my hope 
Is to be honour’d by Jove’s fated will, 
Which keeps me close beside these sable ships, 
Long as the breath shall in my bosom stay, 
Or as my precious knees retain their spring. 
Further I say ; and cast it in your mind! 
Melt not my spirit down by weeping thus, 
And wailing only for that great man’s sake, 
Atrides; neither ought you love that man, 
Lest I should hate the friend I love so well. 
With me united, ’tis your nobler part 
To gall his spirit who has galled mine, 
With me reign equal, half my honours share. 
These will report ; stay you here and repose 
On a soft bed ; and with the beaming morn 
Consult we, whether to go home, or stay.” 


Cowper replied :—‘* We are of one mind as to the effect of rhyme or 
euphony in the lighter kinds of poetry. The pieces which your Lord- 
ship mentions, would certainly be spoiled by the loss of it, and so would 
all such. The Atma would lose all its neatness and smartness, and 
Huprpras allits humour. But in grave poems of extreme length, [ ap- 
prehend that the case is different. [ agree with your Lordship that a 
translation perfectly close is impossible, because time has sunk the 
original strict import of a thousand phrases, and we have no means of 
recovering it. But if we cannot be unimpeachably faithful, that is no 
reason why we should not be as faithful as we can ; and if blank verse 
affords the fairest chance, then it claims the preference,” 

Thurlow, probably not convinced, sent the following good-humoured 
reply :—‘‘I have read your letter on my journey through London, and 
as the chaise waits, I shall be short. I did not mean it as a sign of any 
proscription that you have attempted what neither Dryden nor Pope 
would have dared, but merely as a proof of their addiction to rhyme ; 
for I am clearly convinced that Homer may be better translated than 
into rhyme, and that you have succeeded in the places I have looked 
into. But I have fancied that it might have been still more literal, fre- 
serving the ease of genuine English and melody, and some degree of 
that elevation which Homer derives from simplicity.” 

The soothed bard closed the correspondence with the following epistle, 
the last that ever passed between these remarkable men, who had known 
each other half a century : 


494 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


“My Lord, 

«¢] haunt you with letters, but will trouble you now with a short line 
only, to tell your Lordship how happy I am that any part of my work 
has pleased you. I have a comfortable consciousness that the whole 
has been executed with equal industry and attention, and am, my Lord, 
with many thanks to you for snatching such a busy moment to write 
to me, é 

“Your Lordship’s obliged and affectionate 
‘< humble Servant, 
« Wittram Cowper.’”* ° 


Thurlow’s generous anxiety to assist Dr. Johnson, proves to us that 
he was capable of appreciating real excellence, and should make us 
view his own failings with some forbearance. It is well known that the 
great lexicographer, shortly before his death, felt a strong desire, for 
the benefit of his health, to travel into Italy, and that to enable him to 
do so, his friends wished to obtain for him an augmentation of his pen- 
sion from government. The bustling Boswell having applied on the 
subject to the Chancellor, received an answer containing these kind- 
hearted expressions :—‘* [ am much obliged to you for the suggestion : 
and I will adopt and press it as far as I can. The best argument, I am 
sure, and I hope it is not likely to fail, is Dr. Johnson’s merit. But it 
will be necessary, if | should be so unfortunate as to miss seeing you, 
to converse with Sir Joshua on the sum it will be proper to ask — in 
short, upon the means of setting him out. It will be a reflection on us 
all if such a man should perish for want of the means to take care of 
his health.” Mr. Pitt, who, though himself a scholar, and well grounded 
in political science, it must be confessed, never testified much respect 
for literary men, refused in the commencement of his administration to 
do any thing that might be construed into a job. ‘The Chancellor 
called on Sir Joshua Reynolds, and informed him that the application 
had not been successful; but after speaking highly of Dr. Johnson as 
a man who was an honour to his country, desired Sir Joshua to let him 
know that, on granting a mortgage of his pension, he should draw on 
his Lordship for five or six hundred pounds — explaining the meaning 
of the mortgage to be, that he wished the business to be conducted in 
such a manner that Dr. Johnson should appear to be under the least 
possible obligation.” ' 

- The offer was declined, but called forth the following effusion of gra- 


* Cowper, referring to these letters, writes to the Rev. Walter Bagot: “ In answer 
to your question, ‘if I have had a correspondence with the Chancellor?’ I reply— 
Yes! We exchanged three or four letters on the subject of Homer, or rather on 
the subject of my Preface. He was doubtful whether or not my preference of blank 
verse, as affording opportunity for a closer version, was well founded. On this sub- 
ject he wished to be convinced; defended rhyme with much learning and much 
shrewd reasoning, but at last allowed me the honour of victory, expressing himself 
in these words: I am clearly convinced that Homer may be best rendered in blank 
verse, and you have succeeded in the passages that I have looked into.’’—Hayley’s 
Life of Cowper, iii, 28. | 


LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 495 


titude most honourable to both parties :—‘* My Lord, R 9, 1784. 
After a long and not inattentive observation of man- Leer Aaa) 
kind, the generosity of your Lordship’s offer raises in me not less won- 
der than gratitude. Bounty so liberally bestowed I should gladly re- 
ceive, if my condition made it necessary: for to such a mind who 
would not be proud to owe his obligations? But it has pleased God to 
restore me to so great a measure of health, that, if I should now appro- 
priate so much of a fortune destined to do good, I should not escape 


- from myself the charge of advancing a false claim, My journey to the 


Continent, though I once thought it necessary, was never much encou- 
raged by my physicians; and I was very desirous that your Lordship 
should be told of it by Sir Joshua Reynolds as an event very uncertain : 
for if | grew much better, I should not be willing; if much worse, not 
able to migrate. Your Lordship was first solicited without my know- 
ledge; but, when I was told that you were pleased to honour me with 
your patronage, I did not expect to hear of a refusal; yet as I have 
had no long time to brood hope, and have not rioted on imaginary opu- 
lence, this cold reception has been scarce a disappointment; and from 
your Lordship’s kindness I have received a benefit, which only men 
like you are able to bestow. I shall now live, mzht carzor, with a 
higher opinion of my own merit.”* 

Johnson, writing at the same time confidentially to Sir Joshua Rey- 
nolds, said, ‘*‘ Many.words, I hope, are not necessary to convince you 
what gratitude is excited in my heart by the Chancellor’s liberality, and 
your kind offices.”’> 

Thurlow afterwards made a generous atonement for his rough rejec- 
tion of the claims of another man of genius. Crabbe, the poet, when 
he first came to London, being in a very destitute condition, wrote to 
the Lord Chancellor, inclosing him a copy of verses, and received for 
answer a note, in which his Lordship “ regretted that his avocations did 
not leave him leisure to read verses.” The indignant bard addressed — 
to the professed contemner of poetry, some strong, but not disrespectful 
lines, intimating that, in former times, the encouragement of literature 
had been considered as a duty appertaining to the illustrious station 
which his Lordship held. Of this remonstrance no notice whatever 
was taken for a long time. But Burke and Sir Joshua Reynolds having 
mentioned in Thurlow’s presence the genius and the destitution of the 
new aspirant, and that he was about to enter the Church, Crabbe, to his 
great amazement, received a note from the Lord Chancellor, politely 
inviting him to breakfast the next morning. ‘The reception was more 
than courteous, the Chancellor exclaiming, in a frank and hearty tone: 

— ‘The first poem you sent me, sir, I ought to have noticed —and I 
heartily forgive the second.” They break fasted together, and at part- 
ing his Lordship put a sealed paper into the poet’s hand, saying, ‘¢ Ac- 
cept this trifle, sir, in the meantime, and rely on my embracing an early 
opportunity to serve you more, substantially, when I hear that you are 


* Boswell’s Life of Johnson, vol, iv. p. 372. t Ib. 372. 


496 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


in orders.” Instead of a present of ten or twenty pounds as the donee 
expected, the paper contained a bank note for 1002, a supply which 
relieved him from all present difficulties. ‘The promise of a living, | 
make no doubt would have been fulfilled, had not Crabbe soon after 
become chaplain to the Duke of Rutland, and received preferment from 
that liberal-minded nobleman.* 

Thurlow was early in life honourably attached to an accomplished 
young lady, Miss Gooch—of a respectable family in Norfolk, ‘* but she 
would not have him, for she was positively afraid of him.”t He seems 
then to have forsworn matrimony. 

It is with great reluctance that I proceed; but I should give a very 
imperfect sketch of the individual and of the manners of the age, if I 
were to try to conceal that of which he was not ashamed, and which in 
his lifetime, with very slight censure, was known to all the world. Not 
only while he was at the bar, but after he became Lord Chancellor, he 
lived openly with a mistress, and had a family by her, whom he recog- 
nised, and without any disguise brought out in society as if they had 
been his legitimate children.—In like manner, as when [ touched upon 
the irregularities of Cardinal Wolsey, I must remind the reader that 
every man is charitably to be judged by the standard of morality which 
prevailed in the age in which he lived. Although Mrs. Hervey is some- 
times satirically named in the ‘ Rolliad” and other contemporary publi- 
cations, her /éatson with the Lord Chancellor seems to have caused 
little scandal. In spite of it he was a prime favourite, not only with 
George III. but with Queen Charlotte, both supposed to be very strict 
in their notions of chastity ; and his house was not only frequented by 
his brother the Bishop, but by ecclesiastics of all degrees, — who cele- 
brated the orthodoxy of the head of the law,—his love of the established 
church,—and his hatred of dissenters.t It should likewise be stated in 
mitigation, that he was an affectionate parent, and took great pains with 
the education and breeding of his offspring. A son of his is said to 

* Life of Crabbe, 101, 56. 

+ Her own words in extreme old age. She was married to Dr. D’Urban, a phy- 
sician at Shottisham, the father of the venerable Sir Benjamin D’Urban. There 
was a relationship between the Gooches and the Thurlows—and their intercourses 
being renewed, old Mrs. Gooch used to call Edward Thurlow “ child,” while he 
called her “mother.” She often related that Thurlow, when Attorney-General, 
having rode over to Shottisham to visit them, as he was taking leave, and mounting 
his horse, she said to him, “ Well, child, I shall live to see you Lord Chancellor.” 
His answer was, “I hope so, mother.” 

}.When I first knew the profession, it would not have been endured that any one 
in a judicial situation should have had such a domestic establishment as Thurlow’s, 
but a majority of the Judges had married their mistresses. The understanding 
then was, that a man elevated to the bench, if he had a mistress, must either marry 
her or put her away. For many years there has been no necessity for such an 
alternative-—The improvement in public morals, at the conclusion of the 18th 
century, may be mainly ascribed to George III. and his Queen, who, though being 
unable to lay down any violent rule, or to bring about any sudden change, they were 
obliged to wink at the irregularities of the Lord Chancellor—not only by their 
bright example, but by their well-directed efforts, greatly discouraged the profligacy 


which was introduced at the Restoration, and continued, with little abatement, till 
their time. 


ee 


SL 


LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 497 


have died at Cambridge, when about to reach the highest honours of 
the university. His three daughters accompanied him in all the tours 
he made after his retirement from office, and were in good society. 
Craddock relates that ‘one evening the Miss Thurlows being at a 
Hampstead assembly, in returning, were in some danger from a riot at 
the door, and that they were rescued by a young officer who handed 
them to their carriage. In consequence the Lord Chancellor calling 
upon him next morning to thank him, and finding him at breakfast, 
offered to partake of it.”*——T'wo of them were well married. The third 
made a love-match against his will, and though he was reconciled to 
her, he never would consent to see her husband. 

It has been said that Thurlow was a sceptic in religion; but I do not 
believe that there is any foundation for this assertion, beyond the laxity 
of his practice, and an occasional irreverence in his expressions on re- 
ligious subjects,—which, however censurable, were not inconsistent with 
a continuing belief in the divine truths he had been taught by his pious 
parents. A letter from him to a gentleman who had obtained a prize 
for a Theological Essay, and to whom he gave a living, displays great 
depth of thinking, and may be reconciled to orthodoxy :— 

“Oct. 13, 1785. 
ceSir, 

“return you many thanks for your Essay, which is well composed, 
notwithstanding the extent, difficulty, and delicacy of the subject. The 
mode of future existence S not delineated to the human mind; although 
the object is presented to their hope, and even recommended to their 
imagination. Upon this, the humbler, perhaps, the safest reflection 
seems to be, that human sense is capable of no more, while perfect 
Faith is recommended. Is it not dangerous to insinuate, that sensible 
conviction might lessen the importance of worldly concerns too much? 
(p. 23.) 

‘* Perhaps, also, the speculation is not free from danger, when im- 
proved disquisition, enriched imagination, and livelier affection are dis- 
tinctly assumed, as the attainments@f a state, which is to be so much 
changed, that it cannot be, or at least is not revealed to the human sense. 
(p. 12, 15, 17.) 

“Perhaps more is put upon the immateriality of the soul than the 
negative of a thing so unknown as matter, is worth, (p. 7.) 

“The observation at the head of the next page seems to dispose of 
the question more solidly and piously. When the Philosopher despises 
a Heaven on the other side of the blue mountains, in which the com- 
pany of a faithful dog makes a principal article of enjoyment, is he sure 
that his visions are more wise, in proportion as they are less sen- 
sible ? 

*«« Perhaps the certainty that God is good, affords a surer proof, and 
not less distinct. 


“Yours, &c. - Tabacco 


*“ An anecdote introduced to prove that Lord Thurlow could be a courteous 
nobleman, as well as an affectionate parent.” —Crad, i. 75, 


VOL. V. 32 


498 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 

There seems to have been, however, a prevalent opinion among his 
contemporaries, that he was lax in his religious observances. Of this 
Burke took rather an unfair advantage during Hastings’s trial. Com- 
menting upon the arrest of a Rajah at the hour of his devotions, he said : 
‘It has been alleged, in extenuation of the disgrace, that the Rajah was 
not a Brahmin. Suppose the Lord Chancellor should be found at his 
devotions (a daugh),—surely we may suppose the keeper of the King’s 
conscience so employed (renewed laughter), and suppose that, while so 
employed, he should be violently interrupted and carried off to prison,— 
would it remove or lessen the indignity that he was not a Bishop? No! 
the Lord Chancellor would think of the prayers he had lost, and his 
feelings would be equally acute as if he wore lawn sleeves in addition 
to the robes of his office, and his full-bottom wig.” The reporter adds, 
‘«« None were grave at this sally save the Chancellor himself, who looked 
like a statue of Juprrer Tonans, and cared as little for exercises of 
piety.” 

Under ostentatiously rough manners, I am inclined to believe that he 
preserved great kindness of disposition, and there can be no doubt that, 
if at last a little hardened from being long hackneyed in the ways of the 
world, he was naturally tender-hearted. When still a young man, he 
lost his favourite sister, to whom he had been most affectionately at- 
tached. I have great pleasure in laying before the reader a most feeling 
and beautiful letter, written by him to the physician who had attended 
her, and who had announced to him her dissolution after a long and 
painful illness. 


‘*¢ Dear Doctor Manning, 

“‘T return you many thanks for your letter, which I can almost bring 
myself to call agreeable. ‘The two last letters [ received from my 
brother, convinced me that she was not to be saved by nature or art; 
and it quite harrowed me to reflect on the pain she endured. I suppose 
the frailty of all human things makes it a common accident: but I have 
brought myself to think it my own singular ill fortune to be disappointed 
in everything I have ever set my hanrt upon. In general, it is my point 
to withstand any extraordinary affection for any article in life, but I 
forgot myself in this instance. My sister was singularly agreeable to 
me, and [ was equally assiduous in courting her friendship “and culti- 
vating her affection. The wretched end of it is, that I never was so 
unhappy before. 

‘But it is foolish to trouble you with any more of this: I cannot 
omit, however, expressing my sensibility of your tenderness and atten- 
tion to her, and my perfect satisfaction in your skill and care; a mighty 
dull and gloomy satisfaction, but it is all the ablest and kindest physi- 
clans can expect in so melancholy an hour, 

‘“‘T am, dear Sir, with great respect, 
“Your most obliged 
‘©and obedient Servant, ‘OK. Tourtow. 
“Inner Temple, Friday.”* 


* Written about 1768. 





: 


| 


LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 499 


Lord Thurlow was very kind to his brothers. For one of them he 
obtained successively the great living of Stanhope, the Mastership of the 
Temple, the Deanery of Rochester, the Deanery of St. Paul’s, the Bish- 
opric. of Lincoln, and the Bishopric of Durham. Ona son of this brother 
he conferred a sinecure in the Court of Chancery, for which a compen- 
sation is now received of 9000/. a year. He provided, likewise, very 
amply for his other kinsmen. What more proved the goodness of his 
disposition wag, that notwithstanding occasional gusts of passion, which 
they were a little afraid of, he continued to live with them all un terms 
of great familiarity. Soon after he was made Lord Chancellor, he ad- 
dressed his clerical brother in the following terms :—‘ Tom, there is to 
be a drawing-room on Thursday, when I am obliged to attend, and as 
I have purchased Lord Bathurst’s coach, but have no leisure to give 
orders about the necessary alterations, do you see and get all ready for 
me.” The Bishop forgot to get the arms altered, and the Earl’s coronet 
reduced to a Baron’s. Afraid of a storm, he resorted to the expedient 
of ordering the door to be opened as soon as the carriage stopped at the 
house, and held open till the Lord Chancellor was seated, who having 
examined the interior, stretched out his hand, and most kindly exclaimed, 
«* Brother, the whole is finished entirely to my satisfaction, and I thank 
you.”* The same expedient was resorted to again at his return from 
St. James’s, and by the next levée day, the carriage was altered accord- 
ing to the rules of heraldry. 

I have already had occasion to refer more than once to Thurlow’s 
personal appearance, and particularly to his dark complexion, and 
bushy eyebrows. O’Keefe, the famous farce writer, has left us a little 
portrait of him shortly before he was removed from office, at a moment 
when he must have been suffering from bodily pain: “I saw Lord Thur- 
low in court: he was thin and seemed not well in health; he leaned 
forward with his elbows on his knees, which were spread wide, and his 
hands clutched in each other. He had on a large three-cocked hat, his 
voice was good, and he spoke in the usual judge style, easy and familiar. r 
But, generally speaking, although pretending to despise the opinion of 
others, he was acting a part, and his aspect was more solemn and im- 
posing than almost any other person’s in public life—so much that Mr, 
Fox used to say, “Sit proved him dishonest, since no man could be so 
wise as Thurlow looked.” 

His manner made an awful impression on all who beheld him, and I 
have seen this successfully mimicked by the late Lord Holland, SO as 
not only to create a belief of profound wisdom, but to inspire some ap- 
prehension into the company present of being committed to the Fleet, 
or of being taken into custody by the Gentleman Usher of the Black 
Rod. Yet in private life, he could, on rare occasions, lay aside his 
terrors,—aflecting mildness and politeness. Once when at Bath, he 
went to the pump-room and sat there, booted and spurred. Being in- 
formed by the master of the ceremonies, that it was against rule to 


ers ie. 


500 REIGN OF GEORGE IItI. 


appear there with spurs, be said, “ the rules of Bath must not be dis- 
puted,” and not only ordered his spurs immediately to be taken off, but 
that an apology should be made in his name to the company.* 

‘* Many stories of Thurlow’s rudeness,” says his friend Craddock, 
“have been in circulation; but it should be fairly stated that he was 
ever more cautious of speaking offensively amongst inferiors than 
amongst the great, where he sometimes, indeed, seemed to take a 
peculiar pleasure in giving proofs of his excessive vulgarity. A single 
instance of this singular humour will be sufficient. On his return from 
Scarborough, he made visits to. some of those splendid mansions with 
which the county of York so greatly abounds, and'a friend of mine had 
the honour to meet him at one of them, then full of very high company. 
Whilst walking in the garden, and they were all admiring the elegancies 
which surrounded them, the noble proprietor being near the hot-house, 
turned to the Lord Chancellor, and politely asked him whether he would 
not walk in and partake of some grapes. ‘Grapes!’ said Thurlow, 
‘did I not tell you just now I had got the gripes?’ The strangers in 
the company were all petrified with astonishment.” 

A body of Presbyterians made an application to him to assist in re- 
pealing certain statutes which disqualified them from holding civil offices. 
He received the deputation with great civility, but in bis own blunt 
manner replied, ‘‘ Why, gentlemen, if your old sour religion had been 
the Establishment, I might have complied; but as it is not, you cannot 
expect me to accede to your request.” They retired, smiling, and pro- 
bably less dissatisfied than if he had tried to reason them into a convic- 
tion of the justice of the Test and Corporation Acts.T 

Although he by no means despised the smiles of royalty, and ‘* prin- 
cipibus placuisse viris” was not a low object of ambition with him, he 
was a courtier in his own peculiar fashion, and sometimes he used a 
freedom of speech which from any other man would have been offensive. 
Lord Eldon used to relate the following anecdote: ‘ Once, when the 
mind of George III. was not supposed to be very strong, I took down 
to Kew some acts for his assent, and [ placed on a paper the titles and 
the effect of them. The King, perhaps suspicious that my coming down 
might be to judge of his competence for public business, as I was read- 
ing over the titles of the different acts, interrupted me, and said, ‘ You 
are not acting correctly, you should do one of two things, either bring 
me down the acts for my perusal, or say, as Thurlow once said to me 
on a like occasion : having read several, he stopped and said, ‘ It wasall 
damned nonsense trying to make me understand them, and that I had 
better consent to them at once.’ ” 

On the occasion of a public procession, the Prince, who had taken 
offence at something Thurlow had said or done, rudely stept in before 
the Chancellor. Thurlow observed, “ Sir, you have done quite right: 
I represent your royal Father: Majesty walks last. Proceed, Sir.” 

At Brighthelmstone the Prince of Wales, living with a gay set of 


* Cr, i. 72. t+ Cr. i. 73, 


LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 501 


frivolous young men who displeased the Ex-chancellor much, asked him 
frequently to dinner, but always met with an excuse. At last, walking 
in front of the Pavilion in company with them, he met Lord Thurlow, 
and pressed him much to dine with him, saying, “‘ You must positively 
name a day.” Lord Thurlow, looking at the party who were with the 
Prince, said, “If [ must name a day or time, it shall be when your 
Royal Highness keeps better company.” 

At another time Lord Thurlow had voluntarily given the Prince some 
advice, which was far from being palatable. His Royal Highness was 
so angry that he sent to him to say, that in future Carlton House gates 
would be shut against him. Lord Thurlow answered,—“ I am not 
surprised ; proffered favours always stink.”” The Prince, conscious of 
the ungenerous return he had made, acknowledged his error, and they 
again became friends, 

The Prince once sent Sir Thomas Tyrwhitt to the Ex-chancellor, to 
ask his opinion respecting some difference in the royal family. ‘ You 
may tell your master,” said Thurlow, “I shall not give him my opinion.” 
** My Lord,” said Sir Thomas, ‘I cannot take that message to his 
Royal Highness.” ‘ Well then,” said Lord Thurlow, * you may tell 
him from me, that if he can point out one single instance in which he 
has followed my advice, I will give him my opinion on this matter.” 

Traditionary anecdotes, to show the violence of his temper, particu- 
larly on the marriage of his favourite daughter without his consent, I 
pass over as not sufficiently authenticated ;* but it is certain that, by 
reason of a quarrel he had with Holland, the architect, who had con- 
tracted to build a grand new house for him at Dulwich, he would never 
enter it, and he continued to live in a small inconvenient lodge close by.t 

In Thurlow’s time, the habit of profane swearing was unhappily so 
common that Bishop Horsley, and other right reverend Prelates, are 
said not to have been entirely exempt from it; but Thurlow indulged 
in it to a degree that admits of no excuse. I have been told by an old 
gentleman, who was standing behind the woolsack at the time that Sir 
Ilay Campbell, then Lord Advocate, arguing a Scotch appeal at the bar 
in a very tedious manner, said, ‘I will noo, my Lords, proceed to my 
seevent pownt.” “I'll be d dif you do,” cried Thurlow, so as to 
be heard by all present; ‘this House is adjourned till Monday next,” 
and off he scampered.—Sir James Mansfield, Lord ‘Chief Justice of the 
Common Pleas, used to relate that while he and several other legal 
characters were dining with Lord Chancellor Thurlow, his Lordship 
happening to swear at his Swiss valet when retiring from the room, the 
man returned, just put his head in, and exclaimed “I von’t be d d 
for you, Milor,” which caused the noble host and all his guests to burst 








* His family accounted for his whimsicalities in his later years by the shock he 
sustained from the flight of this daughter—to whom he had been so much attached, 
that he made himself master of the principles of thorough-bass that he might super- 
intend her musical practice. A 

+ An action brought against him by Holland came on for trial before Lord Ken- 
yon, who, for the dignity of the Chancellor, got it referred to arbitration. 


502 REIGN OF GEORGE IIL 


out into a roar of laughter.*—From another valet he received a still 
more cutting retort. Having scolded this meek man for some time 
without receiving any answer, he concluded by saying, “I wish you 
were in hell.” The terrified valet at last exclaimed, ‘‘ I wish I was, 
my Lord! I wish I was !” 

Sir Thomas Davenport, a great nisi prius leader, had been intimate 
with Thurlow, and long flattered himself with the hopes of succeeding 
to some valuable appointment in the law, but several good things passing 
by, he lost his patience and temper along with them. At last he ad- 
dressed this laconic application to his patron :—‘* Tur Cuter JusTice- 
sHip oF CuEsTeR Is vacANT; Am I To Have Ir?” and received 
the following laconic answer :—* No! sy Gop! Krnyon sHALt 
HAVE 1T!” 

Having once got into a dispute with a Bishop respecting a living of 
which the Great Seal had the alternate presentation, the Bishop’s secre- 
tary called upon him, and said, ‘* My Lord of sends his compliments 
to your Lordship, and believes that the next turn to present to be- 
longs to his Lordship.”——Chancellor. ‘* Give my compliments to his 
Lordship, and tell him that I will see him d d first before he shall 
present.”—Secretary. ‘This, my Lord, is a very unpleasant message 
to deliver to a Bishop.” —Chancellor. ‘+ You are right, it is so; there- 
fore tell the Bishop that I will be d d first before he shall present.” 

With all his faults, it must ever be remembered to his honour that, 
by his own abilities alone, without flattery of the great, or mean com- 
pliances with the humours of others, he raised himself from obscurity 
to the highest dignity in the State ;—that no one can ascribe his rise to 
reputed mediocrity, which is sometimes more acceptable than genius, 
and that for a period of forty years he not only preserved an ascendency 
among distinguished lawyers, statesmen, and orators, but that he was 
regarded with respect and esteem by eminent poets, moralists, and 
divines. 

I shall conclude this memoir swith sketches of him by some of his 
contemporaries, which may better enable the reader justly to estimate 
his merits than any observations of mine. ‘The first is from a volume 
published in 1777, when he was Attorney-General, entitled, ‘‘ Public 
Characters,” in which it is remarkable that his name is spelt ‘* Thurloe,” 
like that of Cromwell’s Secretary :—‘‘ His voice is harsh, his manner 
uncouth, his assertions made generally without any great regard to the 
unities of time, place, or probability. His arguments frequently wild, 
desultory and incoherent. His deductions, when closely pressed, illo- 
gical, and his attacks on his adversaries, and their friends, coarse, vulgar, 
and illiberal, though generally humorous, shrewd, and pointedly severe.” 

«The Chancellor Thurlow,” says Bishop Watson, “ was an able and 














* T am afraid that profane swearing was then much practised by men of all de- 
grees in Westminster Hall. I remember when Sir James Mansfield was Chief 
Justice of the Common Pleas, and the unruly members of the coif who practised 
before him led him a most wretched life, it was said that one evening, having fallen 
asleep on a sofa in a lady’s drawing-room, he was heard to call out several times in 
his dream, ““G— d the Serjeants !” 





tis 


LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 503 


upright Judge; but as the Speaker of the House of Lords, he was 
domineering and insincere. It was said of him in the Cabinet, he op- 
posed every thing, proposed nothing, and was ready to support any 
thing. I remember Lord Camden’s saying to me one night when the 
Chancellor was speaking contrary, as | thought, to his own conviction : 
“There now, [ could not do that; he is supporting what he does not 
believe a word of.’* “Few,” says Colton, ‘have combined more 
talent with more decision than Lord Thurlow. Nature seems to have 
given him a head of crystal and nerves of brass.” t 

Sir Nathaniel Wraxall, describing the state of parties in the year 
1781, says, ‘* Lord Thurlow, who at this time had held the Great Seal 
between two and three years, though in point of age the youngest mem- 
ber of the Cabinet, enjoyed in many respects greater consideration than 
almost any other individual composing it—Lord North had derived the 
greatest assistance from his eloquence and ability. His removal to the 
House of Peers would have left an awful blank on the Treasury bench 
in the midst of the American war, if his place had not, during the two 
succeeding years, been ably, perhaps fully, supplied by Wedderburn, 
As Speaker of the Upper House, Lord Thurlow fulfilled all the expecta- 
tions previously entertained of him. His very person, figure, voice, and 
manner, were formed to lend dignity to the woolsack. Ofa dark com- 
plexion, and harsh but regular features, with a severe and commanding 
demeanour, which might be sometimes denominated stern, he impressed 
his auditors with awe before he opened his lips. Energy, acuteness, 
and prodigious powers of argument characterized him in debate. His 
comprehensive mind enabled him to embrace the question under dis- 
cussion, whatever it might be, in all its bearings and relations. Nor, if 
we except Lord Camden, who was already far advanced in life, did the 
opposition possess any legal talents in the House of Peers that could 
justly be put in competition with those of Lord Thurlow. These ad- 
mirable points were, nevertheless, by no means unaccompanied by 
corresponding defects. As Lord Chancellor, he was accused of pro- 
crastination in suffering the causes brought before him in his court to 
accumulate without end. Perhaps this charge, so frequently made 
against those who have held the Great Seal, was not more true as 
applied to him, than of others who succeeded him in his office. But 
even in Parliament his temper, which was morose, sullen, and untract- 
able, sometimes mastering his reason, prevented him from always exert- 
ing the faculties with which Nature had endowed him, or at least clouded 
and obscured their effect. In the Cabinet, these defects of character, 
which rendered him often impracticable, were not to be surmounted by 
any efforts or remonstrances, It can hardly be believed that at minis- 
terial dinners, where, after the cloth was removed, measures of state 
were often discussed or agitated, Lord Thurlow would frequently refuse 
to take any part. He has even more than once left his colleagues to 
deliberate, whilst he sullenly stretched himself along the chairs, and 


* Life of Watson, 221. + “Lacon,” i, 45. 


504 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


fell, or appeared to fall, fast asleep. If I had not received this fact from 
an eyewitness, and a member of the Cabinet, I should not, indeed, ven- 
ture to report so improbable a circumstance. Notwithstanding the 
ruggedness and asperity which he displayed,—qualities that procured 
him the nickname of ¢he tzger,—no man could at times appear more 
pleasing, affable, and communicative in conversation, | have once or 
twice seen him on such occasions, which were more highly valued 
because they were rare or unexpected. Possessed of faculties so trans- 
cendent, however mingled with human ‘weakness and infirmity, he must 
always be considered as one of the most eminent individuals who sat 
in the Councils of George III. at any period of his reign,’”’”* 

In 1796, Bishop Horsley thus dedicated to Thurlow his “ Prosodies 
of the Greek and Latin Language.” ‘“ Although, I wish at present to 
be concealed, I cannot persuade myself to send this Tract abroad with- 
out an acknowledgment, which perhaps may betray me, of how much 
my mind has been informed, and my own opinions upon this subject 
have been confirmed, by conversations which many things in this Essay 
will bring to your recollection, Were I to form a wish for my country, 
it should be that your Lordship might again be called to take part in 
her councils, where you would display that wisdom, firmness of prin- 
ciple, aad integrity, with which you so long adorned one of the highest 
public stations. A better wish, perhaps, for you may be, that you may 
enjoy many years of learned leisure.” 

Next comes the portrait of Thurlow by Dr. Parr, which, although the 
features be exaggerated, almost to caricature, certainly presents a very 
striking likeness -—‘ Minas posumus contemnere vocemque fulmineam 
Thrasonici istius oratoris rod rag dppis xvavéas éanpxdrog, cujus vultum, uti 
Noviorum istius minoris, ferre posse se negat quadruplatorum genus 
omneet subscriptorum, Quid enim? truculentus semper incedit, teterque, 
et terribilis aspectu. De supercilio autem isto quid dicendum est? annon 
reipublicze illud quasi pignus quoddam videtur? annon senatus illo, tan- 
quam Atlante ccelum, inaititur?—Profecto non desunt qui Novium 
existiment in ‘summa feritate esse versutissimum, promtumque ingenio 
ultra Barbarum.’ Quod si demseris illi aut ¢podpérnra quanta in Bruto 
fuit, aut rixporyra vere Menippeam, aut spotwmou cxvdpirnra propriam et 
suam, facile ejus vel prudentiz vel fidei juris nodos legumque enigmata 
ad solvendum permiseris.—Fervido quodam et petulanti genere dicendi 
utitur, eodemque, nec valde nitenti, nec plane horrido, Solutos irriden- 
tium cachinnos ita commovet, ut lepores ejus, scurriles et prorsus vetera- 
torios diceres. Omnia loquitur verborum sane bonorum cursu quodam 
incitato, itemque voce, qua ne subsellia quidem ipsa desiderant pleniorem 
et grandiorem. In adversariis autem lacerandis ita causidicorum figuras 
jaculatur, ita callida et malitiosa juris interpretatione utitur, ita furere et 
bacchari solet, ut seepe mirere tam alias res agere optimates, ut sit pene 
insano inter disertos locus,—Fuit ei, perinde atque aliis, fortuna pro 
virtutibus. Didicit autem a Muciano, satis clarum esse apud timentem, 


* Wraxall’s Memoirs, vol, i. p. 527. 


| 
| 
| 
| 





LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 505 


quisquis timeatur.: Corpore ipse ingens, animi immodicus, verbis mag- 
nificus, et specie inanium magis quam sapientia validus, studia ad se 
Optimatium illexit, eamque adeptus est auctoritatem, que homini novo 
pro facundia esse posset. Scilicet, quae bonis Titio, Seioque turpissima 
forent, Novium nostrum maxime decent, siquidem e subselliis elapsus 
de Tribunali nune pronuntiet, et ex praecone actionum factus sit institor 
eloquentize senatoriz. Quam igitur in civitate gratiam dicendi facultate 
Q. Varius consecutus est, vastus homo atque foedus, eandem Novius 
intelligit, illa ipsa facultate, quaamcunque habet, se esse in Senatu con- 
secutum— 


‘ Ellum, confidens, catus: 
Cum faciem videas, videtur esse quantivis preti: 
Tristis severitas inest in voltu, atque in verbis fides.’ ”’* 


After the effort of perusing this somewhat pedantic production, the 
reader may be relieved by a few characteristic notices of our hero from 
the pen of Dr. Wolcot, a lively though scurrilous poet, who, under the 
title of Perer Prnpar amused the latter end of the eighteenth century : 
in his Ode ‘to the Royal Academicians,” on portrait painting, he gives 
them this caution : 


“Copy not Nature’s form too closely 
Whene’er she treats your sitter grossly. 
As, for example, let us now suppose 
Thurlow’s black scowl and Pepper Arden’s nose.” 


In another satirical ode, he thus refers to Thurlow’s rough manners 
and habit of swearing : 


“ How pithy ’twas in Pitt, what great good sense, 
Not to give Majesty the least offence ! 
Whereas the Chancellor, had he been there, 
Whose tutor, one would say, had been a bear ; 
Thinking a Briton to no forms confin’d, 
But born with privilege to speak his mind, 
Had answer’d with a thundering tongue, 
‘I think your Majesty d n wrong.” 





. And he is made to go on to swear still more profanely. 
In enumerating those who assisted in the public Thanksgiving at St. 
Paul’s, on the King’s recovery, this satirist describes— 
“ A great Law Chief, whom God nor demon scares, 
Compell’d to kneel and pray, who swore his prayers; 
The devil behind him pleas’d and grinning ; 
Patting the angry lawyer on the shoulder, 


Declaring aught was never bolder, 
Admiring such a novel mode of sinning.” 


By reason of Peter Pindar’s violent attacks on Thurlow and other 
Peers, there was a proposal to bring him to the bar of the House for a 
breach of privilege—to which Peter in his ‘‘ Ode to the Peers” refers : 


“Yes! yes! I hear that you have watch’d my note, 
And wish’d to squeeze my tuneful throat ; 





* Preface to Bellendenus. 


506 REIGN OF GEORGE III. 


When Thurlow your designs most wisely scouted, 
Swearing the poet should not yet be knouted.” 


The Ex-chancellor’s intimacy with the Prince attracting the attention 
of the public, was celebrated in an Epistle from Peter Pindar, thus be- 
ginning— 

*“ Thurlow now is the Carlton House Mentor : 

You know him, Nic; bony and big, 

With a voice like the voice of a Stentor, 
His old phiz in a bushel of wig. 

All the pages, and footmen, and maids, 
As his Wisdom march’d solemnly in, 

(The impudent varlets and jades !) 
Gather’d round him with wonder and grin.” 


In conclusion there is this softening stanza : 


* Yet this in his praise I will say, 
That whether he’s sober or mellow, 
Though as blunt as a bear in his way, 
True Genius admires the old fellow.” 


I have now much pleasure in giving a sketch of him by a surviving 
kinsman who knew him well, and was tenderly attached to him: ‘ His 
countenance was that of a man of the strongest sense, and his eye most 
penetrating and commanding. His stature was lofty and full of dignity, 
and his manners and address highly polished. He could assume the 
sternest character if necessary, or the sweetest smile I ever beheld. 
This stern exterior was, I have often thought, pvt on to cover the most 
kind and feeling heart, and his real nature was but little known but to 
those who had the happiness of living in his society. I remember 
hearing Lord Thurlow read from Shakspeare’s play of the Merchant of 
Venice, that beautiful scene of the judgment of Portia. ‘Then must 
the Jew be merciful.’— Shylock. ‘ On what compulsion must I? tell me 
that.— Portia. ‘The quality of mercy is not strained, it droppeth as 
the gentle dew from Heaven upon the place beneath,’ &c.; and per- 
ceiving a slight tremulousness in his voice, I looked up and saw the 
tears in his eyes.—When Lord Thurlow had a severe fit of the gout, he 
used to be wheeled in a Merlin’s chair from his sitting-room to his bed- 


room at an early hour ; it was in the summer season, and when the proper: 


minute came, his valet Buissy, without asking any questions, told his 
master it was time to go to bed, and began to wheel the chair with the 
Ex-chancellor in it towards the bedroom. ‘Let me alone,’ said the 
Ex-chancellor. ‘My Lord, it is time to go to bed.’ ‘I won’t go yet, 
come again.’ ‘ No, my Lord, it is time for your Lordship to go to bed, 
and you must go.’ ‘ You be d d, I will not go.” Away went the 
Ex-chancellor, threatening and swearing at the man, which I could 
hear like deep thunder for some time. The Ex-chancellor had suc- 
cumbed, knowing that his good only was considered by his faithful 
domestic.” 

I shall conclude with a metrical effusion from the Rolliad, professing 
to be composed by the Lord Chancellor Thurlow himself, to show his 
qualification for the office of Poet Laureat, then vacant. I need not re- 





LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 507 


mind the reader that, with some just satire upon his swearing propen- 
sity, and other failings imputable to him, this jez d’esprit shows the 
malice of the discomfited Whigs, who were driven to console them- 
selves in almost hopeless opposition by personal attacks on their oppo- 
nents—not sparing royalty itself: 


“IRREGULAR ODE, 


“ By Epwarp Lorp Tuur.Low, 


“ Lord High Chancellor of Great Britain. 


I. 


“ Damnation seize ye all! 
Who puff, who thrum, who bawl and squall! 
Fir’d with ambitious hopes, in vain, 
The wreath, that blooms for other brows, to gain, 
Is Thurlow yet so little known ?— 
By I swore, while George shall reign, 
The Seals, in spite of changes, to retain, 
Nor quit the woolsack till he quits the Throne! sd 
And now, the bays for life to wear, 
Once more with mightier oaths, by I swear! 
Bend my black brows that keep the Peers in awe, 
Shake my full-bottom wig, and give the nod of law. 








Il. 


“What though more sluggish than a toad, 
Squat in the bottom of a well, 
I, too, my gracious Sov’reign’s worth to tell, 
Will rouse my torpid genius to an Ode! 
The toad a jewel in his head contains— 
Prove we the rich production of my brains ! 
Nor will I court, with humble plea, 
Th’ Aonian Maids to inspire my wit: 
One mortal girl is worth the Nine to me ; 
The prudes of Pindus I resign to Pitt. 
His be the classic art, which I despise ;— 
Thurlow on Nature, and himself, relies. 


Ill. 


“Tis mine to keep the conscience of the King ; 
| To me, each secret of his heart is‘shown: 
Who then, like me, shall hope to sing 
Virtues, to all but me unknown? 
Say who, like me, shall win belief 
To tales of his paternal grief, 
When civil rage with slaughter dy’d 
The plains beyond th’ Atlantic tide ? 
Who can, like me, his joy attest, 
Though little joy his looks confest, 
When Peace, at Conway’s call restor’d, 
Bade kindred nations sheathe the sword ? 
How pleas’d he gave his people’s wishes way, 
And turn’d out North, when North refus’d to stay ? 
How in their sorrows sharing too, unseen, 
For Rockingham he mourn’d, at Windsor, with the Queen ? 





508 REIGN OF GEORGE III. . 


Iv. 
‘His bounty, too, be mine to praise, 
Myself th’ example of my lays, 
A Teller in reversion I; 
And unimpair’d I vindicate my place, 
The chosen subject of peculiar grace, 
Hallow’d from hands of Burke’s economy : 
For so his royal word my Sovereign gave ; 
And sacred here I found that word alone, 
When not his Grandsire’s patent, and his own, 
To Cardiff, and to Sondes, their posts could save. 
Nor should his chastity be here unsung, 
That chastity, above his glory dear ; 
*But Hervey, frowning, pulls my ear; 
Such praise, she swears, were satire from my tongue. 


Vv. 


“Fir’d at her voice, I grow profane, 
A louder yet, and yet a louder strain! 
To Thurlow’s lyre more daring notes belong. 
Now tremble every rebel soul, 
While on the foes of George I roll 
The deep-ton’d execrations of my song. 
In vain my brother’s piety, more meek, 
Would preach my kindling fury to repose ; 
Like Balaam’s ass, were he inspir’d to speak, 
*T were vain! resolv’d I go to curse my Prince’s foes. 


vi. 
“ Begin! begin!” fierce Hervey cries; 
“See! the Whigs, how they rise ; 
What petitions present ! 
How tease and torment! 
D—mn their bloods, i—mn their hearts, d—mn their eyes. 
Behold yon sober band, 
Each his notes in his hand; 
The witnesses they, whom I browbeat in vain ; 
Unconfus’d they remain. 
O! d—mn their bloods again ; 
Give the curses due 
To the factious crew! 
Lo! Wedgwood, too, waves his Pitt-pots* on high! 
Lo! he points where the bottoms, yet dry, 





* “T originally wrote this line: 
But Hervey, frowning, as she hears, &c. 


It was altered as it now stands by my d—mn’d Bishop of a brother, for the sake of 
an allusion to Virgil: 








Cynthius aurem 
Vellit, et admonuit.” 


t “I am told that a scoundrel of a potter, one Mr. Wedgwood, is making 10,000 


vile utensils, with a figure of Mr, Pitt in the bottom; round the head is to be a 
motto, 


We will spit 
On Mr. Pitt, 


and other such d—mn’d rhymes, suited to the use of the different vessels.” 


LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 509 


The visage immaculate bear ; 
B Wedgwood d—mn’d, and double d—mn’d his ware, 
D—mn Fox, and d—mn North ; 
D—mn Portland’s mild worth; 
D—mn Devon the good, 
Double d—mn all his name; 
D—wmn Fitzwilliam’s blood, 
Heir of Rockingham’s fame; 
D—mn Sheridan’s wit, 
The terror of Pitt; 
D—mana Loughb’rough, my plague—would his bagpipe were split ! 
D—n Derby’s long scroll, 
Fill’d with names to the brims: 
D—mn his limbs, d—mn his soul, 
D—mn his soul, d—mn his limbs! 
With Stormont’s curs’d din, 
Hark! Carlisle chimes in; 
D—mn them; d—mn all the partners of their sin ; 
D—mn them, beyond what mortal tongue can tell; 
Confound, sink, plunge them all to deepest, blackest Hell !’’* 


| have only further to state that Lord Chancellor Thurlow dying 
without legitimate issue, his first title of Baron Thurlow of Ashfield be- 
came extinct, and that his second of Baron Thurlow of Thurlow, in the 
county of Suffolk, under a limitation in the patent by which it was 
created, descended to his nephew, the eldest son of his brother the 
Bishop of Durham, the father of the present highly respected head of 
the family.* 

I cannot conclude this Memoir without expressing deep regret that 
Thurlow himself had not dedicated a portion of his leisure to the task 
of writing an account of his own career, and of the times in which he 
lived. Considering the events which he had witnessed, the scenes 
in which he had personally mixed, the eminent men with whom he 
had been familiar, and his powers of observation and of description, 
what an interesting work he might have left to us! Born in the 
period of universal tranquillity which followed the peace of Utrecht, 
—he could remember the civil war which rendered it for some time 
doubtful whether the nation was to continue under the constitutional 
rule of the House of Brunswick,—or the legitimist doctrine of here- 
ditary right was to prevail by the restoration of the Stuarts. He 
could have told us the hopes and fears which prevailed on the advance 
of Prince Charles and his Highlanders to Derby,'and the varying joy 
and consternation produced by the news of the victory at Culloden. 
~—-He might have contrasted the gloom in the public mind from the dis- 
appointments and disasters of the war terminated by the treaty of Aix- 
la-Chapelle with the popular exultation and enthusiasm arising from the 
capture of Quebec, and the other glories of the administration of Chat- 
ham.—Himself playing an important part soon after the commence- 
ment of the reign of George III., he might have explained to us the new 
policy of the Court, and made us better acquainted than we shall ever 
be with the short-lived administrations and factious movements which 


* Rolliad, p. 321, 22d edition. + Grandeur of the Law, p. 142. 


510 REIGN OF GEORGE III 


distracted the realm from the fall of Lord Bate till the premiership of 
Lord North.—Thence he could have laid bare to us the infatuated 
councils by which the empire was dismembered, and he might have 
disclosed his matured sentiments on the errors which were committed, 
and the line of policy which might have saved the country from the cala- 
mities by which it was nearly overwhelmed.—What an account he might 
have given us of his position in the Rockingham cabinet, and the diver- 
sion he had, surrounded with Whigs, in playing off one section of them 
against another, and preparing the return of ‘Tory domination !—What 
an agreeable variety might have been presented to us when he was not 
only in opposition, but out of office, during the Coalition government— 
remaining still the secret adviser of the sovereign !—Then would have 
come the defeat of the Coalitionists,—with the mitigation of his triumph 
in finding himself under a boy statesman who professed a respect for 
public liberty, and was actually disposed to reform the law and the 
state.—Next would have appeared their mutual manceuvres for ‘ trip- 
ping up the heels” of each other.—But, oh! what ‘ Confessions” might 
our autobiographer have made when he arrived at the Regency !—fa- 
vouring us with the details of his double negotiations,—and informing us 
of the process whereby he had tears at his command at the sight or sound 
of royal suffering,—which is the true version of the story of his being 
detected by the disappearance of his hat,—and whether he heard from 
the woolsack the prophecy uttered by Wilkes, sitting on the steps of the 
throne, as to the catastrophe which was to happen before he could be 
“forgotten.” We should have known who communicated to him the 
astounding intelligence that he was dismissed; and we should have 
seen his towering indignation when he found that the Master who he 
thought valued him so highly threw him, like a worthless weed, away. 
—His opinion of his brother Peers, both while he presided over them 
and when he became the lowest in rank among them, would have been 
particularly racy.—He would not have felt himself at liberty to publish 
to the world all he had observed of the Prince of Wales, and other 
members of the royal family; but, without indiscreet disclosures, he 
might have given us a view of the Court of England at the end of the 
eighteenth and beginning of the nineteenth century which would have 
been highly instructivex—His private opinion of Hastings would have 
been curious,—and we should have been still more desirous to learn his 
real sentiments of the French Revolution, and his anticipations of the 
victor of Marengo, whom he lived to see elevated to the office of Chief 
Consul.—After all, the most valuable chapters would have been those 
wherein he introduced the great literary characters of his age, and nar- 
rated the different ‘‘ rounds” in his intellectual combats with them, com- 
pelling Samuel Johnson to declare, that when he was to meet Thurlow 
he should wish to know a day or two before, that he might prepare for 
the encounter.—Indulging in a satirical vein, the homage paid to Mrs. 
Hervey from the hope of benefiting by his legal and ecclesiastical pa- 
tronage might have afforded a topic still more fruitful—I make no 
doubt, at the same time, that if he had done justice to himself, he. would 





LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 611 


have given us fresh reason to admire not only the vigour of his under- 
standing, but the warmth of his affections ; and some parts of his cha- 
racter and conduct which appear to us censurable or equivocal might 
have been cleared up and vindicated. 

I am painfully conscious that this Memoir of him, notwithstanding 
the pains I have bestowed upon it, is very imperfect ; and my only con- 
solation is, that, feeling the awful responsibility cast upon me to guard 
public and private morality, and to do equal justice to the dead and to 
the living, | have sincerely striven to obey the precept which biogra- 
phers ought to reverence as if it were found in holy writ: ‘ Nothing 
extenuate, nor set down aught in malice.”—I am afrajd | may still have 
to appeal to my own consciousness of impartiality from the censures of 
friends and partisans, when I shall have finished my undertaking with 
the Lives of Loughborough, Erskine, and Eldon.* 


* IT have been kindly favoured by my friend, the present Lord Kenyon, with a 
sight of a Journal kept by his distinguished father, in a succession of almanacs, I 
lay before the reader a few of the most interesting passages, which throw consi- 
derable light on the differences between Thurlow and Pitt,—on the transactions 
connected with the King’s illness in 1788-9,—and on the terms on which Thurlow 
lived with several of his eminent contemporaries :— 

“1784, March 24.—Last night Lord Chancellor’s house broken into, and Great 
Seal stolen, Sent for by Lord Chancellor. With Earl Gower, President of Council, 
to give orders in consequence. Drew Proclamation for prorogation of Parliament. 
25. Searching Council Books for. precedents in consequence of Great Seal being 
stolen, and ordering new one. 28. With the Chancellor and Mr, Pitt about Mas- 
tership of Rolls, which I promised (reluctante) to Mr. Pitt to accept. The Chan- 
cellor much displeased he had not been consulted on law arrangements, and thought 
Chester and Attorney-Generalship too much for Arden, 31. Dined with Lord 
Chancellor, and sworn in Master of the Rolls—kissed the King’s hand. April 1. 
Drawing-room—kissed the Queen’s hand. 

“©1786. April.—Chancellor very ill. Held several seals for him. He had dread- 
ful hiccup. Promised to be his executor if he died—which he said gave him the 
greatest comfort. July 15. I have done the business of the Court of Chancery from 
26th April to this day, on account of my excellent and noble friend’s indisposition. 
Nov. 22. Breakfasted with Lord Chancellor, when he talked very much to me about 
office of Chief Justice of King’s Bench, and said he should be under difficulties to 
find a proper person if I persisted in refusing it, and named Eyre and Buller. 
26. Mr. Justice Buller dined with us. He expressed his most earnest wish that I 
should take the King’s Bench, if he was not to have it, and said he would rather be 
under me than any other man. He expressed his dislike of Baron Eyre. 27. Lord 
Chancellor sent to me upon his receiving a letter from Lord Mansfield desiring to 
resign the office of Chief Justice, The Chancellor again proposed to name me to 
the King, and said that the public looked to me as successor, and that he thought 
neither Eyre nor Buller would be approved by people in general. Dec. 2. Dined 
with Mr. Pitt by his desire, when he pressed me to take the office of Chief Justice 
of King’s Bench, and wished I should reconsider the matter. 12. With Mr. Pitt in 
the Re aiee when I promised him to accept the office of Chief Justice of the King’s 
Bench. 

“1787. Feb. 6. Dined with Mr. Pitt, when he agreed Mr. Serjeant Grose should 
be a Judge of King’s Bench at my recommendation. March 18. Sat great part of 
the week for Lord Chancellor, who was busy in the House of Lords. [Here follows 
an extract from a newspaper.] ‘ Dec. 8. The resignation of Lord Mansfield, very 
much to his honour, is to be delayed no longer. Sir Loyd Kenyon, of course, suc- 
ceeds—indisputably with more learning than any man in the Kingdom !—and as 
certainly not more learned than intrepid and honourable.’ 


512 REIGN OF GEORGE IIl. 


“1788. Feb. I sat some part of last term, and after the term, for Lord Chan- 
cellor, engaged at Hastings’s trial. April 19. At Kenwood, with Lord Mansfield, 
in consequence of a letter from him about his intended resignation. He expressed 
great kindness for me. 23, At Levee. The King expressed great pleasure on his 
intention that I should succeed Lord Mansfield—and spoke long to me, in a most 
gracious manner. June 6. At Levee. Kissed King’s hand on being named Chief 
Justice of King’s Bench, and created a peer. Mr. Pitt carried me in his coach, and 
introduced me. 9. Took leave of the Temple. Sergeant’s motto, Quip Lrags sINE 
Morisus. 11. Presided the first time in King’s Bench. 18, The Chancellor much 
dissatisfied about law arrangements. “19. With Mr. Pitt, by his desire, on the great 
coolness between him and the Chancellor, on Arden being made Master of the Rolls 
against the Chancellor’s inclination—advised him tg see the Chancellor. Nov. 7. 
Dined with the Lord Chancellor, who was just come from the Prince of Wales, 
who had sent for Rim to Windsor on account of the King’s alarming state of 
mind, Had much conversation with the Chancellor as to what was to be done 
if the illness continued—Regency, &c. 9. The Chancellor sent for me again this 
day to consult about the public affairs, he having just had a letter from Dr. 
Warren— Delirium sine febre.’ 10. Breakfasted with Lord Chancellor, who had 
been yesterday at Windsor by the Prince’s desire, and had much conversation 
with the Prince. With Mr. Pitt, by his desire, to converse on the state of 
public affairs. 29. Dined at Mr. Pitt’s. Lord Chancellor, Duke of Richmond, 
Lords Stafford, Chatham, Carmarthen, Weymouth, Sydney, Hawkesbury—con- 
sulting on public affairs. The King removed this day from Windsor to Kew, 
Dec. 1. Dined with Marquis of Stafford—same company as at Mr, Pitt’s, with 
addition of Earl Camden. Signed a paper with the Cabinet Ministers, requesting 
the Queen to take upon her the management of the King’s person during his illness. 
2. Dined at Lord Sydney’s—Lord Chancellor, &c.—consulting about what was to 
be done at Privy Council, and in Parliament. 3. At Privy Council examining 
Physicians. 4. Parliament met on adjournment. Dined at Lord Chancellor’s, 
with Marquis of Stafford. Much confidential conference, wherein the Marquis and 
I agreed in our wishes about the Chancellor’s conduct. 7. Lord Chancellor with 
me about public affairs. 8, Dined at Lord Chancellor’s. He in very ill humour 
with Mr, Pitt. I endeavoured to soothe him, and stated the impropriety of thinking 
of private quarrels in this crisis of public business. 12. Dined with the Lord Chan- 
cellor, who had been this day with the King at Kew. 

“1789. Feb. 3, At Cabinet at Lord Chancellor’s, settling Regency Bill. Mr. Pitt, 
Lord Stafford, Speaker, Attorney and Solicitor-Generals, &c. 20. Dined with the 
Chancellor, who had been at Kew with the King and with the‘ Prince. March 8, 
With the King at Kew by his command. I had a long private conference. He 
delivered me many of his private papers to take home and consider for him—treated 
me most graciously. N.B. At this audience he said to Lord K., ‘ Frederick only 
voted against us once—did he?’ Lord K. answered, ‘your Majesty must be aware 
to what trials one in his situation is exposed.’ ‘ Very true! very true!’ he replied, 
24, With Mr, Pitt to endeavour, if possible, to remove some of the grounds of shy- 
ness between him and Lord Chancellor. Nov. 26. With Secretary Grenville. Read 
‘rom him the King’s commands to endeavour to settle differences between Lord 
Chancellor and Mr. Pitt. 

“1790. Jan. 21. Sat Speaker—opening Session, Lord Chancellor having the 
gout. 25, Attended Privy Council—Frith’s case—throwing stone at the King on 
his going to open Parliament—agreed to commit him for high treason, according to 
opnions communicated from Chancellor and Earl of Mansfield—absent from indis- 
position. March 8. Prince of Wales’s levee. To Bath. Continually with Lord 
Chancellor. Breakfast and dinner—and receiving him and his daughters. 

“1791, March 24. With Lords Grenville and Dundas about Scotch Peers’ elec- 
tion. 25. Breakfasted with Lord Chancellor—persuaded him to confer with Lord 
Grenville on public measures. Sept. Visit from Lord Chancellor and two daughters, 
at Gredington, 

“1792, April 27. With my afflicted friend the Lord Chancellor, who heard of 
Caroline’s elopement to Scotland. He made his will, and delivered it to me as his 
Executor. His daughter Catharine with us several days. 17. With Mr. Pitt, at 





LIFE OF LORD THURLOW. 513 


his request, when he informed me that in consequence of the Chancellor’s opposing his 
measures he had mentioned to the King that one must go out, and the Chancellor 
was to do so. With the Lord Chancellor the same evening to hear the like. June 1. 
With Mr, Pitt about the Great Seal. He desired me to be First Congmissioner. 
15. Parliament prorogued. Chancellor resigned Great Seal. Eyre, Ashurst, Wilson, 
Commissioners. 22. Lord Thurlow and daughters, Judge Buller, Solicitor-General 
Scott, and son, dined with us. 26. Dined at Lord Thurlow’s—three Commissioners 
of Great Seal, and Solicitor-General dined there. July 1. Lord Thurlow and 
daughters Catharine and Mary dined with us. 16, Lord Thurlow, Erskine, Scott, 


&c., dined with us. Dec. 13, Parliament met. Sat Speaker. Thurlow came home 
with me to dinner.” 


END OF THE FIFTH VOLUME. 


‘ 
"y - iy 
1) 2 

A » : 
v5 ARN 

‘ah ST Ie 





Node on ; vhs o> a ge per a Shee te ON: 





a « 
BGA ee ey dee P . 4 2 eek Gass 
i : hay > ine ih coe | se cA aa ve a. wh bY ‘ at at oe “ 

i eicaies. aan ee or cae “4 ; * rr: iow * aanledie 
ia Peat daar se Saheg RSS 
i 1 2 . L 
y + eR net mite ; sagt 
Heo 
| f -visy 





mS : we 2s 
ihe ve Be ree 3. a ae 


ty cae Pe enna ave 
ee a re 















5 7 


) . = a 
« aX 
Wet, 5 ot | 

Teen” 








7 cr Lie ah a 0 a 







ts 


We! Saga ' 
’ ‘ 


heological Seminary Libraries 


wn |. . 


9250 











ae \" 
== 
= et 
ee 
——- 
Se aha x 
= 





